god's man in the race
It will come as a surprise to exactly no one that I don't think much of one Mr. Perry of Texas.
Electoral politics is always a matter of choosing what one can accept in exchange getting (some) of what they want. Or at least think they want. It is absurd to pretend otherwise, which is why I find (purely) partisan triumphalism as puzzling as it is irritating.
Nonetheless, partisan flock and flow is the rule of the day in these United States, and though they by no means hold a monopoly on it, this is particularly true among Republicans. (Democrats are more fickle because their base consists of a disparate coalition--minorities, labor, social liberals--that really don't necessarily have much to do with each other except being historically sort of represented by the Democratic party.)
This is why Rick Perry's performance in recent polls actually scares me a little bit.
My liberal friends too often express hope that the GOP will actually nominate a Perry (or a Bachmann), a fringe candidate that could not possibly win in the general election, ushering in a second term for Mr. Obama by a comfortable margin. Though I think such cynicism is entirely justified (and occasionally laudable) in electoral politics--remember all the Republicans licking their chops at the idea of a Hillary nomination four years ago?--I think they give the American electorate's supposed aversion to the fringes a bit too much credit.
Which is to say, I think a dominionist could be the next president of the United States. And everybody who thinks this is just more of the same boilerplate political evangelicalism really needs to take a good look at what that entails. Because this isn't merely a broadly social conservative platform, but theocracy dressed in conservative drag.