Rick Perry endorses Mitt Romney: What it means moving forward

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • DUPDaze Bakersfield, CA
    April 28, 2012 4:03 p.m.

    Mark B. It may not be your war & I hated Bush for taking that route. Killing one alligator in the swamp without putting up a barrier did little good for the dead soldiers and civiliians. But it checked a bunch of other tyrrants, make no mistake.

    I voted for Hope & Change. He morphed on everyone. I don't "hope he'll change", I'm gonna help him exit. It is a war for folks who got short-changed. So spare the pontificating. If the euphemism fits, embrace it. Cause for me to suit up for Romney is a tough pill for an evangelical, born-again (former) Mormon. My polygamist great-grandpas would be proud, though!

  • thenemo1 u.s.a., NY
    April 28, 2012 2:47 p.m.

    Yeah that's what we need Perry as a potential accidental president if Mitt had a fatal illness and passed away.

  • Mark B Eureka, CA
    April 28, 2012 8:37 a.m.

    If there is another term overused more than "war", I can't think of what it would be. And every NEW use for the term is like a slap in the face for anyone who's been involved in real war. Romney's already got the pickup truck, cowboy hat, gun totin' vote in hand, so Perry's endorsement probably means ten votes for Mitt that would have otherwise gone to Ron Paul. That's about it.

  • Filo Doughboy Bakersfield, CA
    April 28, 2012 12:22 a.m.

    Puhleeze!! Does no one here understand the concept of battle? The primaries were the boys out on leave, kickin' about and slammin' each other. But the Big O tank rolls around the corner and they're rank and file behind their General. Whichever General is leading the troops, NO BODY cares.

    It's a war and you haven't even seen the first salvo yet. Mr. Cardboard Weathervane is gonna morph into whatever he needs to be. It's in his DNA, genetically and religiously. Just give him a new revelation with marching orders and he'll be a good soldier, too. Heck, I don't care if he appeals to the pigs in Iowa or the donkeys in my state. I'd vote for a Johnny Quest robot at this point....

    I've been to Greece. I'll visit again, I don't wanna be Greece. Bring on the Rom Bots. We gotta save our homeland from the Clueless and the Freebies. I'm topped out and done paying for the partiers. So line up the primary losers and suit them up!

  • Oatmeal Woods Cross, UT
    April 27, 2012 5:36 p.m.

    Rick Perry is no friend to Mitt Romney.

  • A voice of Reason Salt Lake City, UT
    April 27, 2012 5:19 p.m.


    I mean this in the nicest way possible, and I agree with you completely- but whenever I hear people say things like "things are slowly falling into place" regarding this election, it sounds like a sinister plot to take over the world. It's like Pinky and the Brain!

  • Riverton Cougar Riverton, UT
    April 27, 2012 5:19 p.m.

    For all those who argue that Romney and Obama to be pretty much the same:

    Is it better to take our chances on Romney, hoping he won't be like Obama, and knowing he can't be much worse, or is it better to stick with Obama, knowing what he has already done and some scary mic asides hinting as to what he might do? The choice is obvious. The chances of Romney being as bad or worse than Obama is very slim.

    We can't afford to keep Obama in office. Literally.

  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    April 27, 2012 4:56 p.m.

    Rick Santorum is still licking his wounds after a very hard ordeal during the past year. He ran a good race and with his type of clientle, it was a difficult task always trying to work around the religious issues to get his votes. He will have to take some deep breaths and hopefully won't be able to subvert the GOP as did Ross Perot did in 1992. He doesn't have the money nor the organization to do it. Perot didn't have an organization but Santorum doesn't have the money. He continued his campaign too long for the chances. He needed another layer of organization to provide him some balance. He ran much and will catch his breath by the convention. Mitt Romney knows how to use an organization and effectively win the complete support by the convention. This President speaks with "I" and does everything in his administration. With that type of "I" he should be blamed for all the failures, including the latest Secret Service. They weren't Secret in this latest events. It is hard to believe it wasn't organized by Colombia to get all 21 military and Secret Service men hooked

  • AT Elk River, MN
    April 27, 2012 4:43 p.m.

    Looks like the author got the memo: don't mention Ron Paul. But, that's the real story here. Did you know: Ron Paul won MN, CO, NV, IA, NH, ME, and may win most/all of the delegate (i.e., unbound states) in caucus states. So, what do I mean by 'won'? He didn't win the "straw poll" beauty contest. However, he has the delegates - Ron Paul supporters hung around after the vote and became delegates. In MN, for example, he has all the slots but 2 or 3. Not only that, his supporters are loyal - much more than the other candidates.

    Of course, you think I'm up in the night. Right? This isn't what the MSM has been telling you. Well, start snooping around. You'll find that what I'm writing is correct. Mitt doesn't have it locked down.

    If Romney gets the nomination, he's going to need to do something to get the Ron Paul people on board. He's going to have a difficult time though, because to the RP supporters, Mitt's really not that different from Obama. It's going to get interesting.

  • CHS 85 Sandy, UT
    April 27, 2012 3:14 p.m.

    @ute alumni

    You mean President Obama and Vice President Biden?

    Can't we show the least amount of respect around here?

  • Flashback Kearns, UT
    April 27, 2012 1:56 p.m.

    Santorum needs to swallow his ego instead of acting like a spoiled kid. As for Perry? Big deal.

  • Jake2010 bountiful, ut
    April 27, 2012 12:34 p.m.

    Things are slowly falling into place to make January 2013 a month to remember!

  • ute alumni Tengoku, UT
    April 27, 2012 12:32 p.m.

    yeap and yomama and scrappy joe are soooo qualified. keep dreaming, o will go in 2013. not soon enough.

  • raybies Layton, UT
    April 27, 2012 11:57 a.m.

    Just proves that the attacks used to scare those who've been prey to antimormon bigotry were never about religious convictions, but solely about acquiring political power.

    And there's no greater manmade power than this... so no surprises here.

  • J-TX Allen, TX
    April 27, 2012 10:07 a.m.

    OUCH, that had to hurt for Perry and Jefress, who consider Romney the next best thing to Warren Jeffs. Amazing how far career politicians and aspiring influence peddlers will go to CYA in the possible future of a Mormon in the White House.

  • Mark B Eureka, CA
    April 27, 2012 9:57 a.m.

    Looks as though the shoe's on the other foot again. Attacking Obama on every single aspect of his life, including his religious beliefs, is just fine. Freedom of Speech, right? But now the same folks, as evidenced in the article, are preemptively whining about an attack on Mormonism which may not happen at all. If it ever does happen, it won't be from some attack command from the administration to the media. The Fox News people would warn us, right?

  • peacemaker Provo, UT
    April 27, 2012 9:25 a.m.

    Republicans at all levels will continue to support Mitt Romney and the American ideals that he represents. The same ideals that established our Constitution and the best government the history of the world has known, not the current spiraling plunge toward socialism and financial ruin which the Obama administration has created.

  • nayajja` Ephraim, UT
    April 27, 2012 9:04 a.m.

    "Not through overt attacks on Mormon theology and practice, which would be out of bounds for most mainstream outlets.? Really? I wish.

    Some would consider the New York Times, Maureen Dowd, Bill Maher, Lawrence O’Donnell, and MSNBC to be mainstream media.

  • TOO Sanpete, UT
    April 27, 2012 7:48 a.m.

    "Not through overt attacks on Mormon theology and practice, which would be out of bounds for most mainstream outlets. Rather, the Obama campaign’s best-case scenario involves a wave of theoretically evenhanded coverage come August and September — newsmagazine cover stories on Mormon theology, 60 Minutes specials on LDS history..."

    Well if that statement does not contraindicate its own self I don't know what does.

  • Stephen Kent Ehat Lindon, UT
    April 27, 2012 7:11 a.m.

    At this point in the process, the word "endorse" perhaps means little more than "acquiesce." But in the effort not just to show unity, but actually to work in a unified way to win the presidential election, even mere acquiescence is a form of support that is more helpful than harmful. When push comes to shove, the overriding effort of the Republicans this fall will be to transform the Democratic president's 2008 two-word campaign slogan into a Republican 2012 one-word slogan:


  • Esquire Springville, UT
    April 27, 2012 7:00 a.m.

    What does it mean? Not much. The right wing won't vote for Obama. The election will be won or lost on who can get the independent votes in a handful of swing states. It won't matter one iota in Texas or in Utah. I know this paper really wants people to like Romney, because the self esreem of Utah and many Mormons is wrapped up in him. This desire to be liked is evident in the coverage you provide. You are looking at the wrong things and asking the wrong questions about this race.

  • Furry1993 Clearfield, UT
    April 27, 2012 7:00 a.m.

    What this means moving forward is that one political hack who wasn't qualified to be President is endorsing another political hack who wasn't qualified to be President. I hope, after November, we can say good riddance to both of them. The country deserves better than either of them.