Posted on 10/19/2011 10:55:39 PM PDT by Clairity
You sound a little shallow. Most people are looking at the policies and the substance behind the candidates. You and way too many people are looking for a debate with Obama and who's the smoothest talker.
Romney is the smoothest, but the worst candidate we could nominate. Poor logic in my mind.
I do credit Cain for being a fantastic human being and I respect the hell out of him. But come on. We're talking about burger flippers.
Furthermore, this same "Cain crowd" that promotes his fantastic legendary status in fast-food is trying to ridicule Texas' minimum wage jobs under Perry - which has proven to be false.
The amount of double-speak is laughable.
I guess you didn’t read my post. I never said ANYTHING about wanting to see a Romney vs. Obama debate. I was talking about Newt vs. Obama & West vs. Biden.
And yes, it would be entertaining to see Newt & West competently and substantively rip Obama & Biden to shreds. Kind of like seeing your hometown team beat the over-rated bullies from the next town over. I don’t see how that makes me shallow. You sound a little pompous.
The difference is that Cain also turned around 450 of the worst performing BK franchises in the US and turned them into the 450 best performing BK franchises in the US
Cain is the sharpest of the bunch and isn’t a career politician. He is a businessman that knows how to analyze a situation, make cuts when and where, and is fiscally responsible.
He has a tax plan that would do away with the IRS and it would also benefit most Americans as well as most businesses, which means those businesses would have more money for R&D, which would make them more competitive in a Global economy, allow them to expand, which in turn would create more jobs, a larger tax base, lower unemployment, and would create a positive economic cycle.
The rest of the field is pushing the same old, same old, and look where it has gotten us.
It may take something like 9-9-9 to turn this country around and make it an economic powerhouse again.
Instead, we are facing a situation similar to that of Greece.
Maybe someone like Cain is the person to get the job done as he has a strong business acumen, is smart and has a demonstrable history of success in several ventures and has turned poor performance into prime performance of the ventures he was put in charge of.
No other candidate can say the same or has his record of success.
Most of these other candidates are just looking to enrich themselves via crony capitalism.
Cain wants all Americans to succeed, regardless of their party, race, economics etc...
We still have a year to go, and a lot could happen between now and then, but the more people hear Herman Cain speak and talk about his plans to turn around the economy, the more he rises in the polls.
The lefty news organizations have made him “Public enemy #1” as they are writing daily hit pieces about him, while propping up the candidate most likely to lose to Obama.
Newt still remains an insider to me and many others, no doubt.....I sure hope he is in “recovery” from his affairs of the past just as Glenn Beck would describe himself as a “recovering alcoholic.”
Cain has the outsider credentials at this point and appears to be the best shot at stopping the Romney annointing.
The whole system is against anyone challenging Romney because 20 percent plus of the delegates are unelected insiders like elected officials and party leaders.
Any challenger will have to get an overhwelming number of delegates that are selected in early conservative states by proportional means and in later RINO states by winner take all.
The RNC just happened to set up the rules that way.
If Cain keeps building momentum, he may be the one. I’d be happy with either him or Newt as the nominee, and I feel pretty confident that either one could beat Obama. I don’t feel that way about any other candidate.
I do think Cain needs to either re-think his 999 plan or learn how to explain it a little better. That apples vs. oranges analogy about state taxes vs. federal didn’t really play too well, for example (IMHO).
The reason I addressed you was because you had (3) posts in this thread where your interest seemed to center around the debate between Obama and the republican candidate "for entertainment purposes." As though we should choose the niftiest debater and make that our main goal. But you aren't the only one. I'm seeing a LOT of people with that mindset and it seems a little "shallow" to me. The race is much more important than picking the fiestiest "debater" to whip Obama. He/she needs to have substance and integrity.
Sorry if I ruffled your feathers.
OMG, that swagger looked so stupid before the last debate.
Really, he looked like a dumbo. I LMBO!
Damn, a decent candidate wouldn’t need 17 million bucks to win my vote. LOLOLOL
LOL, Perry ain’t got a prayer.
I see from your posts that you are a Perry supporter. I guess that’s why you’re so sensitive about people making comments about other’s debating skills. Now, Perry is awful as a debater. AWFUL!! But more importantly he’s not a true conservative. He’s a halfway decent governor, but the conservatives in Texas have been more unhappy with him than not. One example - I lived in Texas during the Guardisil disaster. It was a HUGE DEAL. Now that showed a “mindset”, and it was greatly lacking in “substance & integrity”. Not to mention, it cost a lot of families a great deal of distress.
And he’s too soft on illegal immigration.
The one thing you are correct about is the importance of this race.
We can do better.
No problem, Rodney.
And how proud we would be to have our first Special Needs President.
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.