The New Rick Perry

He’s hardworking, he’s bipartisan, he’s recasting himself for 2016.

Charis Tsevis
Add to Briefcase
Michelle Cottle
Aug. 1, 2014, 1 a.m.

Let’s start with the glasses. You know what I’m talk­ing about: the dark-rimmed, nerd-chic eye­wear that, since last sum­mer, has emerged as the sym­bol of the new Rick Perry—ser­i­ous, thought­ful, vaguely hip­ster­ish. Perry crit­ics mock them as a des­per­ate ploy to make the gov­ernor look smarter, to erase the un­flat­ter­ing con­ven­tion­al wis­dom, ce­men­ted dur­ing his 2012 pres­id­en­tial flameout, that he isn’t all that bright. Re­pub­lic­ans and Demo­crats alike joke about wheth­er the lenses are simply clear glass. Re­cently, when Perry and Sen. Rand Paul got in­to an op-ed spat over for­eign policy, Paul snarked that the gov­ernor’s “new glasses haven’t altered his per­cep­tion of the world, or al­lowed him to see it any more clearly.”

I’d been won­der­ing about the glasses, too. When I spent time with Perry in South Car­o­lina a few weeks ago, the gov­ernor had ac­ci­dent­ally left his spec­tacles back in Aus­tin. “This is the first time I haven’t had them in months!” he com­plained to me after I pulled out my own pair to read the logo on his black golf shirt. “I see fine at a dis­tance,” he ex­plained. But read­ing things close up, like notes for a speech? For­get it. (Shortly after our con­ver­sa­tion, an aide was dis­patched to a North Char­le­ston shop­ping mall to pro­cure an identic­al re­place­ment from a one-hour op­tic­al shop.)

A couple of weeks later, I emailed the gov­ernor’s of­fice to con­firm that his much-dis­cussed eye­wear is used primar­ily for read­ing. In­stead of a simple “yes,” “no,” or “not ex­actly,” I re­ceived an email say­ing Perry would phone me him­self to chat about “the de­tails on the eye stuff.”

And chat he did. On Ju­ly 25, en route home from the Re­pub­lic­an Gov­ernors As­so­ci­ation’s three-day con­fab in As­pen, Perry spent a gen­er­ous 15 minutes or more walk­ing me through his oph­thal­mo­lo­gic­al his­tory—the gist of which really should be con­veyed more or less ver­batim:

“In 1967, when I was a young seni­or in high school, I was hit in the eye with a rock thrown across a foot­ball field by my best friend.” The of­fend­ing pro­jectile “was a smooth stone, the size between a 50-cent piece and a sil­ver dol­lar. It hit me dir­ectly in the left eye. I lost com­plete vis­ion in that eye.”

“Liv­ing where we lived, I didn’t have ac­cess to an oph­thal­mo­lo­gist for a peri­od of time. Long story short, Michelle: My eye mi­ra­cu­lously was healed. I don’t know why. My left eye had filled with blood. I lost com­plete vis­ion. And the eye­sight came back after a peri­od of time.” He cla­ri­fies: “We’re talk­ing about over the course of a month or so.”

(Steven Noreyko)Even­tu­ally, Perry re­ceived a prop­er eye ex­am. “I think an oph­thal­mo­lo­gist took a look and said, ‘Your vis­ion’s fine.’ And so I went on about my life. I went to school. I got a con­tract with the United States Air Force to fly planes. Ob­vi­ously, an eye ex­am is one of the most rig­or­ous parts of that type of phys­ic­al ex­am. My eye­sight was 20/20.” In all his fly­boy days, Perry as­sures me, “there was nev­er, ever any oph­thal­mo­lo­gist or eye ex­am that ever ques­tioned any­thing about my eye­sight.”

“So I go on through life. I hit my 40s, which is when eye­sight starts to de­teri­or­ate. I nev­er really had any de­teri­or­a­tion. Then in my mid 50s—around 2004 or 2005—I start no­ti­cing that I needed some 1.25 or 1.5 read­ing glasses in the even­ing, like if I’m read­ing the Bible or a little something be­fore I go to bed. Then I used the little ones you get at Wal-Mart.” He chuckles. “Be­ing a very frugal fel­low, I would buy three for $10 at Wal-Mart. I’d leave them lay­ing around.”

Fast-for­ward to shortly after the 2012 pres­id­en­tial elec­tion. One night, sit­ting in his of­fice at the state Cap­it­ol, the gov­ernor no­ticed that some air vents run­ning along the wall no longer looked straight to him. “So I did a little self-ex­am and figured out that in my left eye there was some dis­tor­tion in my vis­ion. I went to see an oph­thal­mo­lo­gist. She said, ‘You know what, I’m go­ing to send you to a ret­ina ex­pert. I’m see­ing some things in here that are troub­ling.’ “

And so off Perry went to Aus­tin’s Dr. Armie Harp­er. “He dia­gnosed me with what is re­ferred to as pre-ret­in­al fibrosis. For a lay­man, what that is—that in­jury that oc­curred 45 years ago was start­ing to mani­fest it­self.” Un­like the smooth, con­cave curve of a nor­mal ret­ina, ex­plains Perry, “mine went up and then dipped down and went back up. It looked like some­body had pushed the ret­ina in. What it is, it was the scar tis­sue that had nev­er been read­ily vis­ible from an eye ex­am. He said, ‘It’s like Saran wrap, when you heat it and it crinkles up. That’s what’s hap­pen­ing to your ret­ina. There are two ways to deal with this. Try to cor­rect it with glasses. Or have sur­gery.’ “

Harp­er told Perry the sur­gery was “pretty tech­nic­al.” “He said, ‘I do it. I’m pretty good at it’ “—more chuck­ling from the gov­ernor—”as most doc­tors would say. But he said, ‘I think you will be more com­fort­able if we try to ad­dress this with glasses.’ So any­way, there’s the story of how it came for me to make the de­cision to wear glasses.”

From there, Perry went on to ex­plain how he is right-eye dom­in­ant, how his vis­ion will fade with age much like every­one else’s, what hap­pens when he closes one eye or the oth­er, how his pro­gress­ive lenses help in vari­ous situ­ations, and how, minus his teen­age in­jury, “you’d still see me with little peep­er things we buy at Wal-Mart.” As for his styl­ish new trade­mark, Perry’s wife picked out the frames, and the gov­ernor is well aware of all the snick­er­ing. “From time to time, someone says, ‘You need to get rid of the glasses,’ ” he tells me. “And there’s a cer­tain amount of people out there who say, ‘He got the glasses to change his ap­pear­ance.’ I don’t know wheth­er it changed my ap­pear­ance or not, but I’m pretty com­fort­able. I like be­ing able to see.” 

I RE­LAY THIS ex­traordin­ar­ily com­pre­hens­ive story be­cause, first of all, I fig­ure most every­one in Wash­ing­ton has wondered at some point about Perry’s glasses. But I also share it be­cause, at least in my ex­per­i­ence, it’s some­what un­usu­al for a (po­ten­tial) pres­id­en­tial can­did­ate to call up and lead a re­port­er so far in­to the med­ic­al weeds. That Perry did so speaks to a key as­pect of his re­hab mis­sion: This is a guy seen as hav­ing mailed it in the last time he ran for pres­id­ent, stum­bling and bum­bling his way to dis­aster. This time around, wheth­er it’s find­ing the time for an ex­act­ing oph­thal­mo­lo­gic­al dis­cus­sion, mak­ing re­peat vis­its to Iowa, or of­fer­ing self-de­prec­at­ing jokes about his 2012 belly flop, Perry wants every­one to know that he is ready—gung ho, even—for the nit­pick­ing and hoop-jump­ing and all-around hard work that a ser­i­ous White House cam­paign en­tails.

And it’s true that you really can’t fault Perry for lack of polit­ic­al ef­fort these days. Earli­er this sum­mer, there was the for­eign policy ex­change with Paul, in which he took a swing at his po­ten­tial 2016 com­pet­it­or on the op-ed pages of The Wash­ing­ton Post, prompt­ing a Paul coun­ter­punch in Politico Magazine and a flurry of me­dia buzz about the feud. More re­cently, Perry has been all over the on­go­ing child-mi­grant crisis: tak­ing mul­tiple trips to the bor­der, call­ing up Na­tion­al Guard troops, and slam­ming Obama’s hand­ling of the situ­ation at every op­por­tun­ity. The gov­ernor is also work­ing hard to raise his TV pro­file, hit­ting the staid Sunday shows (Meet the Press and This Week), light­er fare such as Jimmy Kim­mel Live, and cable scrap­fests like Cross­fire. “Spar­ring with Stephanie Cut­ter is good prac­tice for him,” says Jeff Miller, Perry’s top strategist and the CEO of Amer­ic­ans for Eco­nom­ic Free­dom, the dark-money group born from the ashes of the pro-Perry su­per PAC Make Us Great Again.

At the same time, Perry is trav­el­ing the coun­try on what might best be termed a Texas vic­tory tour, brag­ging about his state’s boom­ing eco­nomy. The gov­ernor’s pre­ferred MO is to jet in­to a blue state with a less shiny eco­nom­ic out­look (Cali­for­nia and New York are his fa­vor­ite whip­ping dogs), talk up the busi­ness-friendly cli­mate back home, and in­vite loc­al busi­nesses to re­lo­cate. There have also been schmooze-athons with donors in money cen­ters in­clud­ing New York City and San Diego, policy tu­tori­als with think-tankers from AEI, Hoover, Brook­ings, and the Man­hat­tan In­sti­tute, and the oc­ca­sion­al over­seas trek (Jer­u­s­alem, Lon­don, Da­v­os). “We’re booked out like this through the end of the year,” Miller told me.

This time around, Perry wants every­one to know that he is ready for the nit­pick­ing and hoop-jump­ing and all-around hard work that a ser­i­ous White House cam­paign en­tails.

The flurry of activ­ity seems geared to send a very clear sig­nal: If he runs again, Perry isn’t go­ing to be a di­let­tante cam­paign­er. In 2012, “I learned two very good, hum­bling, frus­trat­ing les­sons,” he tells me, in a re­frain he is re­peat­ing con­stantly of late. “One is that you need to be fit—and ma­jor back sur­gery did not al­low me to be fit, phys­ic­ally or men­tally. And the oth­er is pre­par­a­tion. I don’t care how many times you have been elec­ted gov­ernor of Texas. You can­not para­chute in­to the pro­cess of be­ing vet­ted for the nom­in­a­tion for the Re­pub­lic­an Party without prop­er pre­par­a­tion. It is a long and ar­du­ous task.”

In his last bid, Perry entered the race late—in Au­gust 2011—but due to the weak­ness of the field, he im­me­di­ately be­came the front-run­ner. This sud­den prom­in­ence con­ferred ob­vi­ous perks, most not­ably the abil­ity to raise $20 mil­lion in six weeks. (“That had nev­er been done be­fore,” notes his then-strategist Dave Car­ney.) But it also came with bur­dens, in­clud­ing a re­lent­less spot­light trained on a can­did­ate who was un­tested na­tion­ally. Perry was soft, sloppy, and clue­less about how to ne­go­ti­ate the primary mine­field. It’s tough to be the front-run­ner when “you’re still try­ing to get your sea legs un­der you,” sym­path­izes Bob Vander Plaats, head of the Fam­ily Lead­er, a so­cial-con­ser­vat­ive act­iv­ist group in Iowa. “When Mike Hucka­bee was first run­ning in 2008, nobody knew who he was, so nobody was fol­low­ing him, and he got a chance to make mis­take after mis­take in farm­houses across Iowa.” By con­trast, says Vander Plaats, every “goof-up” Perry made—and there were plenty—im­me­di­ately be­came na­tion­al news.

The most fam­ous goof-up, of course, oc­curred in a Novem­ber GOP de­bate, when, in a dis­play of an­ti­gov­ern­ment fer­vor, Perry vowed to eu­th­an­ize three Cab­in­et agen­cies—but could only re­mem­ber the names of two of them (Com­merce and Edu­ca­tion). Fol­low­ing some hem­ming and haw­ing and an at­temp­ted as­sist from Mitt Rom­ney, Perry offered up an em­bar­rassed, “Oops.” Quick­er than you can say “De­part­ment of En­ergy,” he be­came a glob­al punch line.

Perry now blames the gaffe, and his shoddy per­form­ance in gen­er­al, on the back med­ic­a­tion he was tak­ing at the time. But meds aside, the broad­er prob­lem was that Perry’s en­tire can­did­acy seemed premised on the idea that he could take short­cuts. His cam­paign’s in­fra­struc­ture was deeply flawed (his team missed the Vir­gin­ia bal­lot dead­line) and its staff was cocky (they thought they could skip tire­some tasks like kiss­ing up to Iow­ans and work­ing the polit­ic­al me­dia). “They were grossly over­con­fid­ent in their own abil­it­ies—crazy con­fid­ent,” mar­vels Bill Miller, a vet­er­an GOP lob­by­ist in Aus­tin. “They were play­ing by their own rules. They thought they were geni­uses.”

Now Perry is try­ing hard to check all the boxes he missed a few years ago. “The last 20 months,” he in­forms me, “have been spent in a fairly in­tens­ive prep mode on all the big is­sues that face the com­mand­er in chief of this coun­try.” Twenty months: In oth­er words, Perry has been work­ing on a re­boot since be­fore Mitt Rom­ney’s corpse was cold. Last Ju­ly, he an­nounced he would not seek a fourth full term as gov­ernor. Freed from the Texas trail, he has de­voted much time to stump­ing for fel­low Re­pub­lic­ans across the coun­try, gath­er­ing chits, and re­in­tro­du­cing him­self to voters in states such as Flor­ida, Pennsylvania—and, of course, Iowa. Last cycle, Perry stiffed the Hawkeye State. “His team res­isted help, they denied help, and that hurt him,” says Vander Plaats. But Perry is mak­ing an ap­pro­pri­ate ef­fort this time, notes Vander Plaats, at whose Fam­ily Lead­er­ship Sum­mit the gov­ernor is signed up to speak in early Au­gust (along with 2016 maybes Bobby Jin­dal, Rick San­tor­um, Mike Hucka­bee, and Ted Cruz). “He’s learned that it doesn’t do any­body any good to skip the Iowa pro­cess,” Vander Plaats says. Cracks Bill Miller of Perry’s early, mul­tiple Iowa vis­its, “It’s kaf­feeklatsch city! If people there are drink­ing cof­fee and he’s not sit­ting at the table, it just means he had to go to the bath­room.” 

THE NEW PERRY  isn’t just work­ing harder than his 2012 in­carn­a­tion. He’s also seek­ing to oc­cupy a dif­fer­ent polit­ic­al space. Last time, Perry ran as a con­ser­vat­ive firebrand. This time, with Cruz and oth­ers suck­ing up all the oxy­gen on the right, he is try­ing out a new mes­sage. For­get the wild-eyed cow­boy squawk­ing about how Texas might be forced to se­cede from the uni­on. Today’s Perry is pitch­ing him­self as a thought­ful, seasoned eld­er states­man.

Two weeks be­fore Perry stormed the bar­be­cues of South Car­o­lina, I saw him in Wash­ing­ton as he cour­ted a very dif­fer­ent audi­ence: At the St. Re­gis hotel, he lunched with a couple of dozen re­port­ers, field­ing ques­tions and shar­ing thoughts on the state of the na­tion, the GOP, and the pres­id­ent. Look­ing es­pe­cially pres­id­en­tial—gray suit, burnt-or­ange tie, and, at 64, still the best head of hair in polit­ics—he bounced from top­ic to top­ic, but kept re­turn­ing to a couple of over­arch­ing themes.

For one thing, he hammered home the idea that the GOP (and Dems, too, for that mat­ter) must “stay fo­cused” on put­ting Amer­ica back to work and stop “get­ting dis­trac­ted” by di­vis­ive so­cial is­sues. This was, as it happened, a top­ic of in­tense in­terest at the me­dia lunch­eon, since the pre­vi­ous week Perry had caused a mini-tem­pest by com­par­ing ho­mo­sexu­al­ity to al­co­hol­ism at an event in San Fran­cisco. When a re­port­er coyly broached the sub­ject by ask­ing what sorts of is­sues Perry con­siders “a dis­trac­tion,” the gov­ernor dove right in, cit­ing his San Fran­cisco gaffe as Ex­hib­it A. (“I stepped right in it!”) When pressed, at the lunch­eon and else­where, on wheth­er he con­siders ho­mo­sexu­al­ity a dis­order, Perry re­peatedly main­tained that his per­son­al views are not per­tin­ent, that de­cisions on gay rights should be left to the states, and that the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment has far more press­ing crises to con­front.

While this line may play well with liber­tari­ans and mod­er­ate Re­pub­lic­ans, the party base in­cludes a heap of val­ues voters who have vowed not to be taken for gran­ted. Dur­ing his vis­it to the Pal­metto State, I poin­ted out to the gov­ernor that many, many of these folks live in early-vot­ing states such as Iowa and South Car­o­lina. He seemed un­per­turbed. “A lot of folks know people’s re­cords,” he said with an easy smile. “My re­cord’s pretty clear. I’m a so­cial con­ser­vat­ive. But it’s not where I need to be spend­ing my time if I’m pres­id­ent of the United States—if that’s the pro­ject I’m gonna be work­ing on. It shouldn’t be. Our can­did­ate I don’t think should be bogged down with is­sues that are not on the front burn­er of what’s fa­cing this coun­try. And what’s fa­cing this coun­try right now is an eco­nomy that is very slug­gish, that has a growth rate that this year may be zero. And for­eign policy that’s gonna take us years to re­pair.”

Whatever Perry’s per­son­al be­liefs, this is a far cry from the cul­ture war­ri­or of 2011 who ran a Decem­ber ad in Iowa lament­ing, “There’s something wrong in this coun­try when gays can serve openly in the mil­it­ary, but our kids can’t openly cel­eb­rate Christ­mas or pray in school.”

Perry meets with loc­al party act­iv­ists last month in Al­gona, Iowa. (Charlie Neiber­gall/AP)Shift­ing the terms of dis­cus­sion serves a couple of use­ful pur­poses for Perry. First, he sees Texas’s roar­ing eco­nomy as his greatest selling point, and he in­tends to take full cred­it. He’s boiled the state’s busi­ness-friendly cli­mate down to a four-point laun­dry list, which he can ef­fi­ciently tick through at stop after stop: “low taxes, a reg­u­lat­ory policy that is fair and pre­dict­able, a leg­al sys­tem that does not al­low for over-su­ing, and ac­count­able pub­lic schools.” From this them­at­ic base, he can elab­or­ate as much or as little as the par­tic­u­lar audi­ence re­quires.

Fel­low Re­pub­lic­ans agree that the more Perry can keep the dis­cus­sion fo­cused on the eco­nomy, the bet­ter off he is. “Rick Perry is the gold stand­ard,” gushes Flor­ida Gov. Rick Scott of his fel­low gov­ernor’s eco­nom­ic policies. (Scott is an un­abashed Perry aco­lyte.) “If you look at his track re­cord, it’s one of the best, if not the best, in the coun­try.” Says former Bush press sec­ret­ary Ari Fleis­cher: “He’s got a strong re­cord, es­pe­cially on eco­nom­ics, job cre­ation, and growth.”

More broadly, Perry seems to re­cog­nize that he no longer has a shot at be­ing the row­di­est, most ideo­lo­gic­ally pristine con­ser­vat­ive on the block, or even from his own home state. The ab­so­lut­ists are now swoon­ing over new­er mod­els such as Cruz and, in a slightly quir­ki­er vein, Rand Paul. Perry is neither pure enough nor fresh enough to com­pete with such shiny new pen­nies. In Texas, he placed fourth in the pres­id­en­tial straw poll at this year’s GOP con­ven­tion. (Cruz crushed, with 43 per­cent of the vote.) As The Texas Tribune‘s Ross Ram­sey tells me, “Cruz has tapped that vein of pop­u­list, middle-fin­ger polit­ics.”

Perry, by con­trast, talks a lot these days—somberly and with an al­most pat­ron­iz­ing de­lib­er­ate­ness—about ex­per­i­ence, and ex­ec­ut­ive ex­per­i­ence to be pre­cise. “I think we’ve seen a pres­id­ent who’s in­ex­per­i­enced be­ing an ex­ec­ut­ive,” he tells me. “He’s nev­er been an ex­ec­ut­ive of any­thing. He was in the Illinois state Sen­ate and the U.S. Sen­ate long enough to find out where bath­rooms are, but not long enough to really know how pro­cess works.” Amer­ic­ans, Perry says con­fid­ently, are ready for someone with a little more season­ing. “I don’t think they want to take a chance on an­oth­er Barack Obama.”

His mes­sage seems tailored to reach non-Obama-haters—the kind of voters who will need someone to vote for if Jeb Bush doesn’t run.

He still tosses out the oc­ca­sion­al red-meat phrase like “im­per­i­al pres­id­ency,” and he has been par­tic­u­larly harsh about the bor­der crisis. In­creas­ingly, however, his mes­sage seems tailored to reach non-Obama-haters—the kind of voters who will need someone to vote for if Jeb Bush doesn’t run. Perry mused to the crowd at the St. Re­gis, “I bet if we went around the table, many of you would say that this pres­id­ent hasn’t spent that much time on Cap­it­ol Hill try­ing to find solu­tions.” Obama’s lack of “dip­lo­mat­ic” or “in­ter­per­son­al” skills is a cri­tique Perry floats fre­quently—and one he could have pulled straight from the note­book of Maur­een Dowd or Bob Wood­ward.

Fur­ther ap­peal­ing to voters weary of par­tis­an war­fare, Perry stresses that polit­ic­al lead­ers should have a “civil,” “thought­ful,” even “win­some” con­ver­sa­tion about the chal­lenges fa­cing this na­tion. (“Win­some” is a fa­vor­ite word of his, typ­ic­ally dropped in­to con­ver­sa­tion with a wink­ing smile, lest you worry he’s get­ting too earn­est.) He boasts of hav­ing teamed up with Demo­crats on vari­ous is­sues over the years, such as the es­tab­lish­ment of drug courts and, more re­cently, an ef­fort to com­bat sex-traf­fick­ing. And des­pite Re­pub­lic­ans’ strangle­hold on Texas gov­ern­ment, Perry in­sists he still had to learn how to horse-trade. “On any sub­stant­ive mat­ters, I’m not sure I ever got a full loaf,” he in­sists to me in South Car­o­lina. “I’m not sure I ever got everything I wanted. But I knew how to ne­go­ti­ate up to get­ting something. And I’d rather have a half loaf than no loaf.” On some level, the very no­tion of the com­bat­ive Texas gov­ernor as a bi­par­tis­an uniter is laugh­able. Then again, the GOP bell curve cur­rently fea­tures Cruz and a siz­able con­tin­gent of House mem­bers who view any com­prom­ise what­so­ever as tan­tamount to treas­on.

In ven­ue after ven­ue, Perry as­serts that “gov­ern­ment has a role.” He cheers pub­lic-private part­ner­ships and, un­like many in his party, sees the Ex­port-Im­port Bank as vi­tal in pro­mot­ing Amer­ic­an in­terests abroad. At every op­por­tun­ity, the gov­ernor draws a sharp dis­tinc­tion between lead­ers like him­self, who have been re­spons­ible for get­ting stuff done, and Cap­it­ol Hill talk­ers such as Paul and, of course, Cruz.

The sen­at­or is clearly a sore spot for the gov­ernor. When his name is men­tioned, Perry’s face erupts in a large, dys­peptic smile. The two Tex­ans have their share of elect­or­al bag­gage (in his 2012 Sen­ate race, Cruz beat Perry’s can­did­ate, Lt. Gov. Dav­id Dewhurst), made heav­ier by the fact that Cruz en­joys tak­ing the oc­ca­sion­al poke at Perry, and vice versa. When asked in May about his gov­ernor’s job-cre­ation mes­sage, Cruz re­spon­ded, “Noth­ing makes me cra­zi­er than politi­cians who run around talk­ing about the jobs they cre­ated. Politi­cians are very good at killing jobs, but they don’t cre­ate jobs.”

Sen. Ted Cruz at the 2014 Re­pub­lic­an Lead­er­ship Con­fer­ence in New Or­leans. (Justin Sul­li­van/Getty Im­ages)Asked about the com­ment, Perry says, “I al­ways give people the be­ne­fit of the doubt.” But the sen­at­or’s cri­ti­cism, he says, is a mis­in­ter­pret­a­tion of his mes­sage—which he’s pretty sure Cruz knows. “Ted and I have nev­er ac­tu­ally sat down and had this con­ver­sa­tion. But my hope is—and I’d be happy to do it, we just don’t see each oth­er that of­ten—that he would agree that gov­ern­ment can be either an im­ped­i­ment to or it can be a pro­moter of a cli­mate that al­lows people to risk cap­it­al. I don’t get con­fused at all. I don’t think I’ve ever done it—and if I have it’s been an over­sight—but I don’t think I ever got up and said, I cre­ated X num­ber of jobs. I talk about Texas. In Texas we cre­ated. And it is a part­ner­ship.”

More vex­ing still may be the way Cruz has bumped Perry from atop the Texas polit­ic­al food chain. “Cruz is the de facto fig­ure­head if not the op­er­a­tion­al lead­er of the party,” says James Hen­son, dir­ect­or of the Texas Polit­ics Pro­ject at the Uni­versity of Texas (Aus­tin). “In Texas, Perry is sort of the Re­pub­lic­an Party of four years ago.” Asked about Cruz’s “It Boy” status, the gov­ernor ra­di­ates con­des­cen­sion. “We all get our 15 seconds of fame,” he coolly re­spon­ded at the St. Re­gis, when ques­tioned about the le­gis­lat­or’s im­pact on Texas polit­ics. Sug­gest­ing that it’s “a little bit early” to as­sess the im­port of “a ju­ni­or sen­at­or” and that we should re­vis­it the situ­ation “in eight years,” Perry com­pared Cruz to the late Demo­crat­ic Gov. Ann Richards: be­loved but not in­flu­en­tial. Ouch.

Perry weaves even his 2012 flameout in­to his ar­gu­ment that voters ought to value his ex­per­i­ence. “I’m glad I ran,” he told the Belt­way re­port­ers, in­sist­ing that the blood­let­ting left him bet­ter pre­pared than all these new kids on the block. In South Car­o­lina, he makes the case to me that even the gant­let of de­bates—which he agrees was “god-aw­ful”—was “a good, im­port­ant pro­cess.”

“I ac­tu­ally think I got to be a pass­able de­bater be­fore the pro­cess was over,” he tells me, not­ing that “you can’t do something 18 times” without at least some im­prove­ment. “The last five or six de­bates were pretty de­cent,” he sug­gests. “I was com­pet­it­ive and gave as good as I took. The early ones, not so much. I read­ily ad­mit I wasn’t pre­pared.” When I ask if po­ten­tially run­ning against an­oth­er Tex­an like Cruz, or per­haps Rand Paul, with his fath­er’s Texas donor base, could com­plic­ate his ef­forts to gain trac­tion, Perry de­murs, mak­ing the broad ob­ser­va­tion, “Run­ning for the pres­id­ency of the United States is com­plic­ated. If you have nev­er done it be­fore, you will find out.”

ONE PERRY AS­SET that was largely ob­scured in 2012 is just how charm­ing he can be one-on-one. By en­ter­ing the race so late, he didn’t leave him­self much time for hanging out with voters in places like Ce­dar Rap­ids or Manchester. In ad­di­tion, Perry’s en­tire de­mean­or last time, com­bined with his hard-right polit­ics, made him come across as some com­bin­a­tion of angry, awk­ward, and out of it. “He was not him­self,” says Vander Plaats, who blames the gov­ernor’s cam­paign team for giv­ing him bad coun­sel. Bill Miller agrees: “He was nev­er on his game.” The Perry that Tex­ans have long known, by con­trast, is a mas­ter of re­tail polit­ics, a guy who can stand around gab­bing with voters all day and who in­ter­acts with people in a way that is a bit goofy but also en­dear­ing. It’s a vastly dif­fer­ent polit­ic­al style than what we’ve grown ac­cus­tomed to from politi­cians such as Obama, Rom­ney, or Hil­lary Clin­ton.

It’s rare to hear a politi­cian speak bluntly about his own polit­ic­al fail­ures, yet Perry is ag­gress­ive in own­ing his.

In South Car­o­lina, I tag along with Perry to a fun­draiser cookout for Rep. Mick Mul­vaney, a Re­pub­lic­an who rep­res­ents the state’s north­ern, rur­al 5th Dis­trict. Be­fore the event, Perry, Mul­vaney, the con­gress­man’s wife, Pam, and a half-dozen mem­bers of the gov­ernor’s team are kick­ing back in a con­fer­ence room in­side the swank, sprawl­ing headquar­ters of the City of Light Cath­ol­ic min­is­tries, where the event is be­ing held. At one end of the long, glossy wooden table, Perry’s people sit talk­ing polit­ics with Mul­vaney. At the oth­er, the gov­ernor is huddled up with Pam, swap­ping stor­ies and pho­tos of kids (Perry has a grown son and daugh­ter), dogs (he has four), guns (he digs them; his wife, An­ita, doesn’t), his 1-year-old grand­daugh­ter, and the un­com­fort­ably stiff cow­boy boots Pam is sport­ing, cus­tom made from a gat­or she shot while in Louisi­ana.

Next thing you know, one of Pam’s boots is off her foot and in the gov­ernor’s hands. (Perry him­self has sworn off cow­boy boots in de­fer­ence to his tem­pera­ment­al spine.) Perry flexes the sole, then sticks his face down in­side the shiny black foot­wear and in­hales deeply. “I just love the smell of new leath­er!” he an­nounces hap­pily. He pauses, looks over at me, and asks, “This is go­ing to wind up in your piece, isn’t it? ‘He likes to sniff wo­men’s shoes!’ ” The gov­ernor chuckles, then re­sumes his dis­cus­sion with Pam about the best way to break in boots. (Short an­swer: You just gotta wear ‘em.)

Perry is prone to sud­den out­bursts of en­thu­si­asm or sur­prise. On our second day on the road, head­ing in­to the of­fice of a loc­al real-es­tate agent, I joked to him that I’d double-caf­fein­ated in pre­par­a­tion for our in­ter­view. “Oh!” he ex­claimed, and his eyes popped wide as he spun around to dash back to the id­ling white Sub­urb­an for his for­got­ten iced cof­fee, in the pro­cess trip­ping over a con­crete park­ing block and nearly tak­ing a nose dive. (His press sec­ret­ary looked ready to faint.) Later, dur­ing our tour of a med­ic­al lab, Perry came dash­ing back through the crowd to find me and en­thuse that this was ex­actly the kind of mind-blow­ing in­nov­a­tion that makes Amer­ica the greatest na­tion on earth. And at any giv­en mo­ment, the gov­ernor might whip out his phone and snap pho­tos of whatever tickles his fancy. “Are you Cath­ol­ic?” he gushed as we passed a statue of St. Mi­chael on our way in­to City of Light. “Neither am I,” he beamed, “but St. Mi­chael has al­ways been one of my fa­vor­ites!”

He is also will­ing to get per­son­al in a way that few politi­cians risk but that many voters crave. At one point, while dis­cuss­ing the joys and per­ils of par­ent­ing, he went off on a tan­gent about how, upon leav­ing the Air Force, he moved back home with his par­ents just four days shy of his 27th birth­day. Re­turn­ing to his child­hood room, frozen in time, was “an eer­ie mo­ment,” the gov­ernor re­calls—one neither he nor his dad handled well. With his col­lege de­gree and mil­it­ary stripes, young Rick thought he knew everything. “And my dad thought I was that”—Perry’s voice drops to a stage whis­per—”dumb-ass 17-year-old who had left 10 years pri­or.” It took six months of “fric­tion” to make the trans­ition, re­calls Perry. Then he ar­rives at the punch line: “About six months ago, our daugh­ter moved back in with us. Twenty-sev­en years old. And it really didn’t dawn on me un­til we had about our second clash­ing, and I was just like, ‘I’m ready to strangle her,’ and she’s like”—here he makes a vul­gar ges­ture—” ‘Up yours, old man!’ that “… she is at ex­actly the same stage of her life as I was.” Talk about a story the par­ents of today’s boom­er­ang gen­er­a­tion can re­late to.

Click to see the full cov­er (Char­is Tsevis)

In a dreary land­scape of fo­cus-grouped, poll-tested, pre­pack­aged can­did­ates, Perry stands out. At the Mul­vaney meet-and-greet, Joan Dant and her grand­daugh­ter Mi­chaela Sims raved about Perry’s hon­esty, his “down-ho­me­ness,” and his self-de­prec­at­ing hu­mor. That hu­mor is prov­ing cru­cial in help­ing Perry deal with his 2012 de­bacle. One of his fa­vor­ite laugh lines on the stump in­volves his short-lived front-run­ner status: “You all may not re­mem­ber this, but at one point, I was ahead in the polls.” Pause for ef­fect. “Those were the best three hours of my life.” It’s rare to hear a politi­cian speak bluntly about his own polit­ic­al fail­ures, yet Perry is ag­gress­ive in own­ing his. When I point out that this seems to play well with voters, he smiles. “But it’s true! It has the ad­ded be­ne­fit of be­ing true.”

Also work­ing to his ad­vant­age are, let’s face it, Perry’s good looks. He’s got the rug­gedly hand­some face, the slightly wicked smile, and enough sil­ver creep­ing in­to that hair to make him look dis­tin­guished. One na­tion­al fun­draiser re­called see­ing him for the first time at a Re­pub­lic­an event in 2011: “I am telling you, the ladies there—it was like watch­ing Tom Jones. You re­mem­ber the sing­er? Wo­men would throw their panties on the stage. There is a pher­omone on him wo­men re­act to.”

Wheth­er or not you find him good-look­ing, it’s tough not to at least find him per­son­ally charm­ing. “Rick is just a really likable guy. He’s real down to earth,” says Mul­vaney, who backed him last time but who stresses he has not yet en­dorsed for 2016. “One of the at­trac­tions that sep­ar­ated him from folks like Rom­ney and Gin­grich when he first got in­to the race in 2012 was he had a broad ap­peal to folks. He still does.”

FOR ALL HE’S done to re­make his im­age, though, Perry is still dig­ging out of a Mari­ana Trench-like hole. And it’s hard to find a Re­pub­lic­an play­er or polit­ic­al watch­er who gives his comeback much of a chance. Some dip­lo­mat­ic­ally couch their doubts in nev­er-say-nev­er caveats. “I am very hes­it­ant to dis­miss any­body’s chances out of hand,” ob­serves GOP poll­ster Whit Ayres. “That said, you nev­er get a second chance to make a first im­pres­sion.” Oth­er folks use harsh­er terms such as “crazy,” “bizarre,” and “de­lu­sion­al.” Even if he man­ages to get past the “oops,” the gov­ernor oc­cu­pies an awk­ward, in-between space, Hen­son says: “He wasn’t suc­cess­ful enough in the last cycle to be the guy ‘wait­ing in the wings’ like Mc­Cain and Rom­ney were. Yet he’s not in­sur­gent enough now to be the in­sur­gent.”

“He wasn’t suc­cess­ful enough in the last cycle to be the guy ‘wait­ing in the wings’ like Mc­Cain and Rom­ney were. Yet he’s not in­sur­gent enough now to be the in­sur­gent.”

Some pos­it that Perry isn’t really aim­ing for the White House, but in­stead is hop­ing to bet­ter po­s­i­tion him­self for whatever op­por­tun­it­ies might arise in a Re­pub­lic­an ad­min­is­tra­tion. “There’s some re­hab value to simply be­ing in the pre-can­did­ate pool, if you will,” Hen­son notes. Texas Monthly‘s Paul Burka has sug­ges­ted Perry “would be per­fect for the job” of VPOTUS. The gov­ernor, however, avoids such spe­cif­ics. “Even if I don’t run,” he tells me of his pres­id­en­tial crash course, “I’ll be a bet­ter per­son, be­cause I want to be en­gaged.”

Ari Fleis­cher points out that “if he starts early enough, Perry can rem­edy a lot of the mis­takes he made last time un­der the pres­sure of be­ing the in­stant front-run­ner. He also now be­ne­fits from low ex­pect­a­tions.” Moreover, the on­go­ing bor­der crisis has giv­en Perry a boost in re­cent days, earn­ing him plaudits from Belt­way con­ser­vat­ives and giv­ing him mul­tiple op­por­tun­it­ies to stress his se­cure-the-bor­der-first mes­sage to the party’s base.

Still, it’s a troub­ling sign, say ob­serv­ers both in and out­side Texas, that Perry has fallen off the radar of the money­men. “He’s not even on the al­tern­ate list,” the na­tion­al fun­draiser says. As for Lone Star donors, says Bill Miller, “I’m not hear­ing any­thing. Ser­i­ously. That’s bad for him.” He does al­low that Perry has enough rich friends in the state to col­lect suf­fi­cient “gas money” to “start his en­gine.” But every­one agrees that the gov­ernor will need to start look­ing like a win­ner be­fore the spig­ot opens up. “It’s al­ways dif­fi­cult to go back to donors and get them to re­in­vest in you when you dis­ap­point them,” ex­plains Dave Car­ney. Says Ayres, “They don’t give their money if they don’t think you’ve got a chance.”

It’s also easy for one of Perry’s strengths—his af­fable, cas­u­al per­son­al style—to slide in­to weak­ness, since it can play in­to the ex­ist­ing nar­rat­ive about his lack of in­tel­li­gence. Once set, such polit­ic­al ca­ri­ca­tures are hard to shed—Al Gore was stiff, John Kerry was a flip-flop­per, George H.W. Bush was out of touch—which means that, go­ing for­ward, every­one will be on high alert for Perry to say something “stu­pid.” Any time he for­gets a date, mis­states a budget num­ber, or veers off mes­sage will be spun as fur­ther proof that he lacks the dis­cip­line or brains to be the nom­in­ee.

You can tell that, even as he de­ploys his in­nate, some­what free-wheel­ing charm, Perry is also mind­ful of the need to tread care­fully. Dur­ing mul­tiple speeches and in­ter­views on the road, he broke off mid-sen­tence to ask his press sec­ret­ary to double-check the facts and fig­ures that he was about to drop in­to the dis­cus­sion. (“I want to make sure I get this right!”) When wad­ing in­to even re­motely sens­it­ive top­ics, he pauses to search aloud for the right word or phrase (for in­stance, cast­ing about be­fore set­tling on “eco­nom­ic­ally dis­ad­vant­aged” to de­scribe poor chil­dren in his state). It’s an un­der­stand­able im­pulse. No one knows bet­ter than Perry the per­ils of a thought­less com­ment or sloppy word. On the oth­er hand, too much self-edit­ing and second-guess­ing risk mak­ing him look un­sure of him­self, or ren­der­ing him awk­ward, stil­ted, or ar­ti­fi­cial, wip­ing out that most neb­u­lous of polit­ic­al as­sets, his au­then­ti­city. It is a tricky line to toe, and one that the gov­ernor can’t help but stumble over now and again.

PERRY IS SCHED­ULED  to de­part the Mul­vaney event early to fly back to Aus­tin. (He is testi­fy­ing the next day at a Home­land Se­cur­ity field hear­ing on the bor­der crisis.) In a large din­ing hall packed with voters feast­ing on bur­gers, hot dogs, and chips, the gov­ernor kicks off his ad­dress with a nod to his hosts, talk­ing about how much he ad­mires the Mul­vaneys, and how lucky the crowd is to have Mick as their con­gress­man. He even gives a spe­cial shout-out to Mrs. Mul­vaney’s new boots. From there, Perry rips through his jobs, jobs, jobs mes­sage, tak­ing the usu­al de­tours to slap the ad­min­is­tra­tion on im­mig­ra­tion and for­eign policy. The speech is well re­ceived, though talk­ing with the crowd af­ter­ward it’s hard to tell wheth­er Perry has won any new con­verts. Some people love him, some are un­der­whelmed, and some like him but doubt the chat­ter­ing class will give him a fight­ing chance after last time.

Prob­ably the biggest down­side to his per­form­ance: When gush­ing about his friends the Mul­vaneys, the gov­ernor re­peatedly re­ferred to Pam as “Tammy.” That slipup had some in the crowd chuck­ling after his de­par­ture. But the path to re­demp­tion was bound to come with the oc­ca­sion­al pothole. This time, at least, Rick Perry has giv­en him­self a couple of ex­tra years to smooth out the bumps.


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.