[ken21]

Cain. He changes his position like we change our shorts, daily.

_________________________________________________________________________

you must be watching a different movie.

[Theo]

I see you’re new here.

[jazusamo]

Cain is probably the only candidate we have that Obama would beat in a debate.

You must be a Libertarian, what have you been smoking?

[Graewoulf]

Glad to help.

In 11-2012, which one of these Candidates will YOU choose to balance your future grandchildren’s Federal Debtbooks?

[iowamark]

Cain and Bachmann are solid conservatives, Santorum mostly so. Bachmann is, in fact, intelligent. She showed very bad judgment, however, in hiring liberal Ed Rollins.

Many conservatives trust Cain because of his consistent conservatism and business experience.

Gingrich has been all over the map politically. His private life is undisciplined at best.

Romney and Perry are completely unprincipled, say anything, do anything types. Romney has multiplied his inherited wealth, but his business acumen is overrated.

Paul and Huntsman are not worthy of comment.

[Red Badger]

To say Cain has little experience, shows what little you actually know........

[beancounter13]

Perry...to $100,000 handouts to illegals is ludicrous.

Welcome aboard!

I guess you must be referring to the greatly-exaggerated 'in-state for illegal aliens' controversy. Hopefully, I can provide some clarity, but if not, please feel free to research the Texas law passed in the 77th legislature.

The law simply provides that a person who has been a resident of the State of Texas for 3 years (presumably paying State Sales Tax and State Property Tax which fund state education) will be granted in-state tuition rates regardless of what the yahoos in Washington D.C. call them.

Anybody qualifies for this, move to Texas for 3 years, pay the taxes, get in-state tuition.

I hope this helps.

[Qbert]

IBTZ

[plain talk]

Bachmann is smart and a rising star. needs more time. Perry may be on meds or something for his back. Whatever it is he had a promising start but has fizzled out sort of like a 2011 version of Fred Thompson. He’s a good man but he can’t get it done. He’s toast. A deer in the headlights guy who looked pathetic in that spat with Romney in the debate.

Cain has the ball now. Yes he has a few problems like the stupid 9-9-9 plan and some mistatements and he even claimed he didn’t say things he clearly said. A few misteps but they’re minor thus far and not problematic if he watches his statements going forward. Read his positions on issues at his site. How can a conservative not agree with every single one of them? He is solid. However he has zero political experience. Political experience does matter because he won’t be a dictator CEO at a pizza company. He will have to wheel and deal with hundreds of politicians and world leaders.

Nevertheless I think Cain has the core foundational skills and common sense to grow in the job and get it done. I think given the cards we have been dealt he seems to be best one now to stop Romney. The only other possible option if Cain flounders is Perry. Newt is great in the debates but I can’t see him winning primaries.

[Bean Counter]

I like pancakes, especially when they are nice and hot so the butter melts right in with the maple syrup.

[Jonty30]

I’ll give you my take on each of the candidates.

Bachmann - I think she’s sincerely conservative, but she is not presidential material. She comes across to me a little bit naïve and would be a better asset in Congress than in the White House.

Cain - He’s very quick on his feet, though sometimes he has to dislodge his foot from his mouth in order to say something. However, he has operational experience that all past presidents, who were successful, have had. However, I think he’s would be a good team builder, who would build a strong cabinet and he’d actually be willing to listen to many voices before comeing to a decision and, once he came to a decision, he doesn’t seem like the sort of man that would then waiver from it.

Gingrich - I respect the man’s abilities and intelligence, but I cannot respect the man. I don’t believe that he has enough respect for the presidency to be worthy of the position. However, he would be a definite asset to whichever position in cabinet that the President would deem him fit for.

Huntsman - Liberal. Good thing he has no hope and no prayer of advancing beyond the debates.

Paul - I like him. I’m not a Pauline, but I like him. I hope that he advances far. Very Conservative and very fiscally responsible. Another fine asset to the cabinet.

Perry - another good conservative. He has what it takes to be president. He may be a little weak on immigration, but I do not believe he would throw open the south border for the sake of gathering votes. And I think he would give the states the tools they needed to do what needs to be done in regards to immigration.

Romney - when a candidate is slick and is capable of metamorphising his poition to fit whichever conversation he is in at the moment, he cannot be trusted. I think he’s very much a social democrat and his election would be a continuation of Democratic policies. Even if he could beat Obama, it would be like Obama never left town.

Santorum - I know the gay community just loves the man. :)
I’d like to see him run for congress again.

Between Perry and Cain, I think Perry edges Cain ever so slightly in terms of who I think would be the better president.

[Yosemitest]

NoMoreCareerPoliticians Since you're a new member (home page no created, Since Oct 15,2011), just off your pen name, I'd say Cain is your man.
I have a few questions?

Have you visited 2012 Presidential Candidate Selector and if so what was the recommendation?

Did you visit Pick Your Candidate and if so what was its recommendation?

Have you seen this chart and does it help you?

Have you seen this position chart and does it help?

Finally have you read The Tea Partier versus The Republican?

Bachmann Very conservative, and my first choice, since Palin isn't running.

Cain Very Conservative, very confident, a man I've personally had about an hour conversation with in 2004, and a man I trust.He's my second choice

GingrichThe smartest man on the ticket, and very conservative, but I'm not sure I trust, however, I'd vote for him, my third choice.

Huntsman Not worth my time, an "Establishment Republican" that's just too liberal. He won't ever get my vote.

Ron Paul Wants to legalize drugs, and isn't worth my time, I'd never vote for him.

Perry He's done, and he'll lie to you in a heartbeat. He's an "Establishment Republican" pretending to be conservative, and He'll NEVER get my vote.

Romney He's a real RINO, a real liberal, and he's the "Establishment's Favorite". He'll NEVER get my vote.

Santorum He's too inexperienced, but he's conservative. As a last resort, I MIGHT vote for him, but I'm not sure.

[Vendome]

Cram it nOOb.

Come back in a year.

IBTZ

TROLL

[Allegra]

Paulbot attempting what you see as a clever ruse?

[Lancey Howard]

This is an old cartoon, so don't forget the "Pro-Communist Health Care" and "Anti-Communist Health Care" podiums:

[Atlas Sneezed]

Your first post ever is a vanity thread smearing the GOP candidates?

IBTZ

[bfree]

I’ll just say your post sucks, a waste of time to read your “thoughts”. I can’t imagine why anyone would care about your analysis, I know I don’t care for meaningless tripe.