In a mix of "chess match" plus actual strategy discussion news analysis, the New York Times reports Mitt Romney is ready to take on Rick Perry on three issues: immigration, jobs creation and time in government.
The former makes sense. With the possible exceptions of Jon Huntsman and the one true libertarian in the race (sit DOWN, you Paultards), Gary Johnson, Perry's an outlier on this issue.
That also said, any Texas progressive with brains knows Rick Perry's OK with illegal immigration because his No. 1 campaign donor, Bob Perry, likes the cheap labor to build those cheap suburban homes.
The second one? Given income inequality, plus the barely-legal kickbacks of sorts of Perry's enterprise fund, the Mittster isn't going to be the only GOPer asking questions. The story said that Bachmann is doing a study course on Perry's record. (Is the briefing paper monosyllabic?)
That said, the third one is interesting, and one I hadn't thought of yet. Especially with tea party types being so down on government in general, attacking Perry for, in essence, being a "government lifer" could gain some traction. Romney's been out of government for a while; Bachmann's not been in, on a full-time basis, for very long. Huntsman's out. Newt's out. And Perry spent pretty much a decade in the Lege before running for ag commissioner, so the "lifer" argument has merit.
Next? Wednesday's debate. Tis true that Perry ducked debates in the 2010 general election (and 2006), but couldn't in the primary. The person there for a Bachmann to study is neither Kay Bailey Cheerleader nor Perry, but Debra Medina. If Bachmann wants to do some appealing to tea party true believers, the script is already in place; it just needs some expansion and polishing up.
Also? One thing not yet on the GOP opposition radar, but that they could easily find if they went back to 2006 is the Trans Texas Corridor. That's a big "big government" issue to hang on Perry.