Posted on 11/08/2011 5:07:33 AM PST by mazda77
the best for cain is to be a vp candidate,
but that chance is now gone forever, too.
his strategy in this sexual harassment issue
is not wholesome, rather it is piecemeal solutions,
and this afternoon he is jumping off the cliff by
tryin to keep denying all of these allegations.
gingrich is the best one, imo
he would easily beat obama.
Thank you for sharing your view, indpndtguy!
I agree, A-G. You are famous for your downside legacy of Bill Clinton.
As always with sexual harassment, we know it exists, but we also know it is very hard to prove since it almost always involves a "he said/she said" type of charge.
That is why it is acceptable circumstantial evidence in favor of the defendant if a variety of different people go public with the same accusation against the same individual.
You may never go visit John Doe. However, if one person tells you John Doe is a dairy farmer, then you might suspect that he is a dairy farmer. If over the course of the next year, 5 different people mention John Doe as a dairy farmer, then you are going to start thinking of John as a Dairy Farmer whether you ever meet him or not. That's because the multiple testimonies to the same fact strengthen the original story that John Doe is a dairy farmer. Could these allegations be false? Sure, but at least 3 of the witnesses are not anonymous, in that Herman Cain knows who they are, and they have come forward to some degree in all 3 cases. What this all boils down to, though, is that I will not vote for Mitt Romney in any case, even if he's the last republican standing. I have switched to Newt, Perry, Santorum, Bachmann, and Paul in that order. Huntsman claims to be pro-life. Does anyone know the truth of that?
That is why it is acceptable circumstantial evidence in favor of the defendant if a variety of different people go public with the same accusation against the same individual.
Clinton had a confirmed history of assaulting women and being a womanizer. The same cannot be said of Herman Cain.
Where are the Cain accusers from his positions at Pillsbury and Godfather’s Pizza?
I find it hard to believe you would even consider lumping Cain in with Clinton with no evidence.
The Clinton accusers did not need to read their statements and certainly were not smiling when they gave them.
Did any of Clinton’s accusers have political motives? No. Cain’s accusers have only political motives and have only made the accusations once Cain became a threat to Obama.
Also, Clinton’s accusers didn’t wait for over a decade and there was physical evidence Clinton assaulted Broderick, a very large payment to Paula Jones, and tape recordings of conversations between Flowers and Clinton. Then there was a detailed plan to deal with Clinton’s bimbo eruptions.
This nothing other than an attempt to smear the biggest threat to Obama.
Amen, boy am I with you on this!
I agree that Perry is that type of man.
I think Cain’s accusers are politically motivated. Clinton’s accusers were supporters until he assaulted them.
I joined DE under a different screen name about a month after you and even went to the MFJ on 10/31/98.
Have always greatly admired you work here and your always insightful comments.
BTW, I have lived in Texas for three years and it IA a great state. Also get to San Antonio 3-4 times a year. Don’t thinly I’d want to live there, nut love visiting.
“Cain is listing with women voters and if 10% defect, he can’t win.”
Some women may defect, but maybe the votes from the black community will replace them.
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.