 |
Posted on 11/07/2011 8:10:32 AM PST by Brookhaven
First off, I've never actually seen an episode of "Survivor", but as I understand the show:
(1) It is an elimination game, where players are eliminated one at a time, and the last person standing is the winner.
(2) Players often form alliances to increase their chances of being among the last handful of contestants standing.
It's obvious to see how a political primary is like #1, but something I heard on the radio this morning made me think Herman and Newt may also be using strategy #2: they are going to appear on the Neil Boortz radio show today--together; at the same time; in the same interview.
Herman Cain has bragged about running an unconventional campagin. Newt has been accused by the mainstream media of not taking this seriously, because he's not following a traditional campaign process (yet, he must be doing something right, because he is suddenly getting lots of traction in the polls). Teaming up like this would obviously be another unconventional strategy.
The Texas debate between Newt and Herman revealed a couple of interesting facts about the two:
(1) There is little difference between the two when it comes to long term goals. Oh, they have differences about the road we should take, but they are almost total agreement about the destination. From taxes to entitlements to defense, their ideas about where the country should be headed in the long run are identical.
(2) Their styles are a perfect compliment for each other. Newt is the wonkish, idea guy that is unmatched in explaining HOW we should approach a problem. Herman is the big-picture guy, that excels at explaining WHY we need to take a certain approach to solving a problem.
Newt and Herman are the only two "big change" guys in the race--the only two saying we need to make fundamental changes to our system if we're going to avoid the financial meltdown looming. The other candidates (Romney, Bachmann, Perry, etc...) are tweaking the current system--kicking the can down the road.
Anyway, I haven't seen any stories about Newt & Herman on this, so I thought I'd post it.
PS
With all due respect to Ron Paul, I know he has proposed some "big changes" as well, but they are (for the most part) Libertarian big changes, not conservative big changes.
Gee...sorry I forgot to check with you see what 'most conservatives' and objective people were thinking!
Ahh an “Establishment” follower....
You need to think for yourself and quit letting the Ghouls and Goons in the so called “Main Stream Media” lead you around by your nose.
The “establishment” is against him right now.
There is NO WAY you can deny that right now.
I’m a Gingrich supporter, but that was a nice try to impugn Herman Cain. You contradicted yourself, also. Start with both men very not specific then shift to Gingrich was ... make up your mind if you’re going to toss out vacuous accusations. I heard a lot of specifics from Newt Gingrich. He was also charming and folksy, which to some degree stole the show from Herman who is very folksy.
Oh I know and that is why Perry is droping like a rock in the Polls
Cain and Gingrich are stalking horses. They will split the "able to debate well but morally questionable" voters, Bachmann and Santorum will split the "moderately unsuccessful legislators" voters, Perry and Romney will split the "questionable slick governors" voters and Johnson and Huntsman split the "checked the wrong block on the ballot" voters.
RON PAUL WINS EVERY PRIMARY WITHOUT GOING OVER 12%!!
Both Newt and Cain are playing this for all its worth. Their campaigning for potus will enhance the resume of men and make future speaking tours much more lucrative.
Well stated.
My advice is to start ignoring these yahoos. Bunch of trouble making juvenile delinquents.
President Carter was a master on specifics, and a superb micro manager. President Reagan on the other hand was never a person steeped in details. A great president sets the direction he wants country to move and then the thousands of people in the executive branch manage the details.
|
|
They are in cahoots.
They even said that their biggest disagreement is who should be at the top of the ticket.
Sincere advice from a man who spends most of his time condemning a conservative Republican? You have repeatedly condemned Mr. Cain based on the latest MSM smear attack. This has been a smear attack based on nonspecific allegations by anonymous sources. And your pseudonym is “Reagan Man”? You have repeatedly violated Reagan's 11th Commandment. You should be ashamed.
Agreed. I keep telling myself that’s exactly what I’m going to do but then...oh well, the Spirit is willing but the temper is weak.
I haven’t heard Rove, Perrino et. al. talking down Gingrich. I did see the Rove/Bush gang support Hutchison over Perry for Governor last year. Saying that the former Speaker of the House, who still has his office on the same street as all the lobbysists, is not an establishment guy is ludicrous. Why do you suppose his office is on K street in DC? It is a curious location choice for somebody who does not have much use for the establishment.
Absolutely correct!
Or you can get raw with these strings. Either way, the violin is sweet yet lethal.
Do it!
“As a strategist, he’d be unmatched.”
Bill Clinton’s still alive, and could probably take him out with a coupla minute phone call while he’s on the can.
My advice is to start ignoring these yahoos. Bunch of trouble making juvenile delinquents.
I've been following the back and forth of these posts on this thread and it's good to see a reasonable and logical perry supporter, offering rational debate and civil discussion.
No inflammatory rhetoric nor juvenile name calling, just solid logic and civil discourse.
Thank you Reagan man, those among us that support Herman Cain are very grateful for your calm voice of reason and we will try not to make trouble for you, Mr. reasonable, sir.
With your attitude, President Reagan is requesting that you change your screen name, as your usage of his name is a abomination and a sacrilege.
“Newt is not an establishment guy?”
The previous poster said Newt is not the establishment choice, not that he wasn’t an establishment guy. There’s a difference.
You don’t get any more establishment than Rove, but if he were suddenly to throw his hat in, the powers that be would still pick Romney or Perry.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.