Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cain Surges to Retake National Lead
email from Herman Cain Campaign | November 26, 2011 | Herman Cain

Posted on 11/26/2011 8:08:26 AM PST by republicangel

Edited on 11/26/2011 10:02:42 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]

Dear Patriots and Supporters,

My family and I enjoyed a wonderful Thanksgiving together on Thursday. After spending so much time on the road recently, I was thankful for the time to spend with my wife, children, grandchildren and friends.

I hope you enjoyed your Thanksgiving as well.

I am excited to share a recent Rasmussen (conducted November 21-22) which shows me retaking the lead nationally with 26 percent support. I am leading Governor Romney and Speaker Gingrich by 3 and 12 percent respectively.

The American people want a true conservative in the White House. They are tired of career politicians who are more concerned with getting reelected than fixing the problems that are plaguing our economy.

I have the solutions, and the American people are lining up to show their support.

[mod edit to remove campaign contribution solicitation]

I pray you and your family enjoyed a great Thanksgiving yesterday. We Americans have so much to be thankful for.

Thank you and God bless.


Herman Cain

PS- We will be releasing an exciting new video series this Monday. I will be previewing the video this Sunday on CNN’s State of the Union. Be sure to check your local listings

TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: cain; emailformoney; hermancain; notnews
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 next last
To: 2007 Crusader

Naughty Newt is a LOSER.

21 posted on 11/26/2011 8:47:22 AM PST by fieldmarshaldj (Rick Perry has more red flags than a May Day Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 2007 Crusader

“Donating to Cain is a total waste of your money.”

Even if Cain wins? Doesn’t make sense.

22 posted on 11/26/2011 8:47:26 AM PST by reasonisfaith (Or, more accurately---reason serves faith. (See W.L. Craig, and many others.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: republicangel

There’s something disturbing about soliciting campaign donations with bogus polls numbers.

I wonder if the Cain campaign will be “clarifying” this later. Or perhaps we just took Cain out context and it’s our fault for not clearly understanding...

23 posted on 11/26/2011 8:53:43 AM PST by TBBT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]



“The gist of this poll conducted in Iowa on Nov. 21 “

Are you bored with your own candidate?

Who is your candidate anyway?

24 posted on 11/26/2011 8:55:37 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network ("Galts Gulch" <> Communist China)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]


Yes, they really sent it out. I received it this morning at 8:04.

25 posted on 11/26/2011 8:56:54 AM PST by republicangel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: 2007 Crusader

26 posted on 11/26/2011 8:59:18 AM PST by Fiji Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ScottinVA
I've flip flopped a bit as to Mr. Cain's chances but now think he just may make it. Some of my reasons are given here. I would have been pleased to post the entire article at FR, but without the accompanying videos it would inadequate. Some may well think it inadequate even with them.
27 posted on 11/26/2011 9:00:36 AM PST by DanMiller (Dan Miller)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: bigbob; republicangel; 2007 Crusader
While I’m still of the opinion that these early polls don’t mean all that much,
this is a clear indication that the voting public is not as easily fooled as the
political operatives might wish. with unprecedented ability to take their
messages directly to the people, the game is changing, and Mr. Cain’s
abilities and message are being heard.

that's uncanny true, on all points...
Cain, Shall a (much) better fighter than (ITS MY TURN! :) McPain / Myth.
He'll show a better understanding of Americans than the above &/ Obozo. closing; the Real enemy of Freedom, is Apathy / Defeatism (& the lack
of a decent education :) all Hallmarks of advancing Totalitarian Stat-ism.

28 posted on 11/26/2011 9:00:36 AM PST by skinkinthegrass (I can take tomorrow, spend it all today. Who can take your income, tax it all away. Obama Man can. :)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: 2007 Crusader
Donating to Cain is a total waste of your money.

Wow. Your political powers of persuasion are incredible.

Please contribute more of your intelligence to this discussion.

29 posted on 11/26/2011 9:05:58 AM PST by Erik Latranyi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: republicangel

Go, Cain!

30 posted on 11/26/2011 9:08:54 AM PST by bgill (The Obama administration is staging a coup. Wake up, America, before it's too late.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2007 Crusader
Donating to Cain is a total waste of your money.

Going by the poll numbers it's at least four times smarter than donating to Perry.

31 posted on 11/26/2011 9:10:41 AM PST by buccaneer81 (ECOMCON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: republicangel

I support Herman cain, but yes, I could not verify these numbers outside of a poll taken Nov 3rd. Do we have anything more recent reflecting the results stated? I see Rasmussen reports Gingrich, Romney and Cain at 32%, 19% and 13% respectively. The false accusations sunk in with the mush brains...

32 posted on 11/26/2011 9:17:26 AM PST by Caipirabob ( Communists... Socialists... Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: republicangel

(Sorry for the long post.)

America’s role in the world: Peace through strength and clarity

Posted by Herman Cain on 11/20

A few days ago, after coming under criticism for my answer to a question about Libya in an interview, I made a lighthearted comment that reflected all this – that I’m not supposed to know everything (most of the media quoted me as saying “anything”) about foreign policy.

Bizarre things happen when you run for president, one of which is that statements like this go viral, with people claiming I had somehow made the case that no knowledge of world affairs is required for the job.

I obviously don’t think that, but I’m also quite willing be honest about my strengths. My background is in the business world, and my greatest strength concerns the economy. My motivation in running for president is to apply my leadership skills to all issues – foreign and domestic. But clearly, as I have met with foreign policy luminaries like John Bolton and Henry Kissinger, I have done a lot more listening than talking – because they know a lot more about it than I do, and it would be absurd for me to claim otherwise.

That said, a man taking the oath of office for the presidency must have a sense of America’s place in the world, and must have a clear idea of the challenges, threats and opportunities that present themselves. Otherwise, success on the economic front likely goes for naught, as mistakes in the international arena tend to be costly both in the short term and in the long term.

My approach to foreign policy is to apply a general set of principles to each situation we face, and I have summarized these principles as peace through strength and clarity. This is a modernized version of the Reagan philosophy that helped bring down the Soviet Union and the communist regimes of Eastern Europe, and also won a series of victories – though not a complete and lasting victory – in South and Central America.

What does this mean?

In a broad sense, it means that I would not retreat on initiatives that strengthen America’s strategic standing in order to buy some sort of accommodation with those who do not have an interest in our security. For example, I would not have welched on America’s commitment to install a missile defense system in Eastern Europe because the Russians didn’t like it. The security of the U.S. and our allies would take precedence over the concerns of a nation whose strategic interests are often contrary to ours.

That is one of the reasons I would not have signed the New START treaty, as President Obama did in 2010. Not only did that treaty commit America to arms reductions that the Russians would not necessarily have to match, but it permitted them to maintain a sizable advantage in tactical nuclear weapons, while ignoring programs and ambitions of other nations like Iran, North Korea, China and Pakistan. But more to the point, we simply don’t need to be signing treaties like this with unfriendly countries. The United States can make its own decisions about the nature and the volume of strategic assets we want to deploy. We don’t need to ask anyone’s permission.

As president, I intend to be a strong supporter of America’s strongest allies, and that absolutely includes Israel. I agree with the statement of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that if Israel’s enemies were to lay down their weapons today, there would be peace, whereas if Israel were to lay down its weapons, there would be no more Israel. Supporting Israel is crucial not only because it is an important strategic ally, but also because it is the most free and democratic nation in the region, and a threat to Israel’s security is a threat to freedom everywhere.

Peace through strength and clarity means there is no doubt about where we stand, for what we stand and with whom we stand. We stand in support of free nations who respect the rights of their people and do not threaten their neighbors. And we treat our allies like allies. President Obama’s lukewarm treatment of Great Britain has served to create tension within the most important strategic relationship we have ever had. Likewise, his friendly embrace of Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez during a meeting of regional leaders sent exactly the wrong signal, as did his naïve statement during the 2008 campaign that he would sit down and talk to Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad without conditions.

Peace through strength means recognizing that we are the United States, and we are the ones who approach these things from a position of strategic superiority. Clarity means we treat our allies like allies, and others have to earn the right to stand with us (and that especially applies to those who hope to receive aid from us – that isn’t happening if you are hostile to us or to our allies).

I agree with former President George W. Bush that the United States should promote free democratic movements throughout the world, and that it is in our strategic interests to do so. That does not mean we try to “impose democracy at the barrel of a gun,” as some of Bush’s rather disingenuous critics claimed he was doing. It means we support these movements where the opportunity presents itself (as President Obama should have in Iran and Syria) or when strategic necessity compels us (as I believe President Bush correctly did in Iraq in 2003). And you don’t always have to use force.

Peace through strength and clarity also recognizes the danger posed by nuclear proliferation, particularly when it involves regimes like Iran or North Korea, which give every reason to believe they may initiate the use of nuclear weapons against other nations. The U.S. must be willing to use its power to stop nuclear proliferation. If we regard such action as beyond the pale, then we essentially concede that all non-proliferation agreements are meaningless.

The most effective application of strength is that which is rarely used. Our troops are already overstretched and our financial resources are limited. An America that is capable and ready, and backs up what it says, won’t have to take action all that often. The world’s bad actors will know we are serious.

I think it’s clear by now that I am not going to score the best of all the candidates on media pop quizzes about the details of current international events. Some have claimed that I take some sort of perverse satisfaction in not knowing all these details. That is not true. I want to know as much as I can. But a leader leads by gathering all the information available in a given situation, and making the best decision at the time based on that information, and in accordance with sound principles. As president, I would not be required to make decisions on the spur of the moment based on a question from a reporter. I would make them the way I made them as a CEO – based on careful consideration of all the facts and the best advice of the best people.

But it is crucial to understand that my foreign policy decisions will always be based on the principles I have laid out here. That will not change, because these are the principles that best represent America’s heritage, and best advance our interests, as well as the interests of all freedom-loving nations and peoples.

33 posted on 11/26/2011 9:21:36 AM PST by BagCamAddict (If you hate a particular candidate, look inward, and ask why you are so full of hate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2007 Crusader
Donating to Cain is a total waste of your money.

Posting pompous drivel like yours is a total waste of FreeRepublic's bandwidth.

34 posted on 11/26/2011 9:21:46 AM PST by COBOL2Java (Obama is the least qualified guy in whatever room he walks into.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tflabo
Cain/Gingrich. Herman can serve one term, retire and Newt can pick it up in 2016.

Just a thought.

A better thought...


Locks it up for the next 4 election cycles.

35 posted on 11/26/2011 9:32:50 AM PST by spokeshave (Cain....100% American, 100% Black and 100% for the Constitution...999 an added benefit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: spokeshave


Your suggestion, would save the Republic.

Donald Trump as US trade representative, promoted to a full cabinet position.

America would begin a new American century.

36 posted on 11/26/2011 9:34:50 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network ("Galts Gulch" <> Communist China)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: 2007 Crusader
Donating to Cain is a total waste of your money.

Thanks for the input, Myth.

37 posted on 11/26/2011 9:35:22 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum ("The very idea of a community organizer is to stir up a mob for some political purpose." Ann Coulter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network

No, I’m not.

I’ve supported Cain from the get go. Who is your candidate and when did you come to that realization?

38 posted on 11/26/2011 9:37:11 AM PST by loucon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network

Was the poll not conducted in Iowa on November 21?

Before I was for Cain I was for Palin.

Thanks for your concern. Open book, I am.

39 posted on 11/26/2011 9:39:16 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network ("Galts Gulch" <> Communist China)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: loucon

Sorry post 38 was intended to answer your question.

Responded to the incorrect post.

40 posted on 11/26/2011 9:40:59 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network ("Galts Gulch" <> Communist China)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson