Posted on 10/12/2011 6:07:16 AM PDT by US Navy Vet
There was one clear winner from Tuesday's Republican presidential debate, based on the simple metrics of name recognition: businessman Herman Cain's "9-9-9 Plan."
Virtually all the candidates at the debate table had something to say about Cain's plan to replace the tax code with three, flat nine-percent federal taxes on consumption, business and income. Cain, once delegated to the remote wings of the debate stage, has enjoyed a surge in the polls ever since he won the straw poll in Orlando, Fla., last month, and at the first debate since he joined former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and Texas Gov. Rick Perry in the top tier, Cain and his policy proposals took up more of the debate's time than the ideas floated by any other candidate.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
So you are OK with a Orwellian outlook on the govt. The whole purpose of ridding the IRS it to get rid of that aspect.
In a perfect world we wouldn’t need an enforcement agency from the govt. at all PERIOD. Obama arming 1600 IRS agents with shotguns? This doesn’t seem troubling to you?
Key sentence. A tax on gross eliminates the "bribe me and I'll cut you a tax break" sword that hangs over businesses. The side benefit is that businesses will take a harder look at where their money goes - with no more unproductive tax write-offs, the money will be directed to areas that create wealth and jobs.
It will be tough on the spendy restaurants, country club memberships and all the other outfits that exist only because of those write-offs, but perhaps this country will then get back to making things other people really need.
GAG,
Yep, she sounded pretty confident that she 'could' win in that running outfit.
Perry has more fleas than any NYC dogpound : )
SO, you don’t suggest anything new. Just trying to convice the half of the populace that thinks that they pay no taxes to be concerned about spending.
How’s that working out for ya?
Don’t like Newt?
Yes, but who’s better? I can only come up with Newt, possibly.
Newt used to be good, but he lost it.
I don’t get the strategy of any of these candidates. Myth is just resting on his laurels playing to the RINO vote and the others except for Ricky and Myth’s jealous little RINO brother Huntsman (he’s so unctuous he makes Romney look charming) are mostly ignoring him and going after each other for the conservative vote.
I still put absolutely no stock in Cain or Bachmann or any other candidate playing patsy for Myth. I don’t buy into this grand conspiracy stuff. It is possible though they don’t want to piss him off so they will be considered for VP if he wins. Mitt himself pissed off McCain enough that ole John would’ve rather seen Mitt dead than as his running mate. If this becomes a two way race the other candidate will of course have to turn their fire on Myth.
As I said before I don’t like introducing a sales tax (ditching the payroll tax is very nice though). I also question Cain’s strategy of making his tax plan the be all end all of his campaign. I disagree with him that congress is likely to pass it. None of that leads me to prefer Rick over Cain though.
Newt (very mixed feeling on him), MB, and the other Rick had a good night. I like that Santorum seems pissed off at everyone just like me. We’ll see if there is any movement in the polls.
I don't really agree with the basic conclusion that Sarah Palin was our big chance for a conservative savior, but the analysis of the existing GOP field is spot on. We're right back where we started a few monthes ago before anyone knew whether Bachmann, Daniels, Perry, or Huckabee would run -- based on what we have in front of us, it's a matter of picking the "least mediocre" one.
Basically if Bachmann, Santorum, or Cain was elected President, I'd be fairly confident they'd make a good leader, govern with integrity, and make a real effort to reverse the damage Obama caused. That said, I think all three are long shots to win the nominaton and I don't think they'd be very strong general election candidates against the Obama machine. But the bottom line is I could happily vote for any one of those three. Cain's getting all the buzz, of course so was Bachmann prior to Perry jumping in and sucking all the air out of the room for weeks. I don't think this latest surge will last til January, though personally I would love it if Cain kicked Romney and Perry's butts in iowa. But if I had to bet, I'd guess Cain is old news by Thanksgiving and there's a new "rising star" getting all the buzz in a month.
Roemer. Perry, and Romney are in my next tier, don't care for any of them, think they'd be a lousy person to nominate. Roemer has less than a zero chance of winning so I don't concern myself with that. If it's either Perry or Romney I'd have to hold my nose to vote for them. And since I'm in Obama's "home" state, it really doesn't matter how I vote. I wouldn't be happy if any of them were the nominee and bottom line is I don't trust them to do the "right thing" if they became the next President.
Bottom of the barrel for me is Gingrinch, Paul, Johnson, and Huntsman. I'd get physically ill if they were "our" nominee. Newt's the best of the bottom tier, he'd an excellent speaker and a genuine policy genius, but the man is a scumbag and having met him in person I can verify he's a total a-hole to boot. Not to mention he has a record of selling his soul to leftists. If he was nominated, it would most likely gurantee another Obama term. Paul and Johnson are just plain flakey and support the far-left on some major policy isues. Ick. Huntsman is a total RINO, a non-entity, and has zero chance of beating Obama. But at least his daughters are hot.
Are they better than Obama? Yes, I can honestly say that even the last person on my bottom tier (non-entity Huntsman) wouldn't be as bad as Obama. But by the same token, I think this country would improve if Obama was replaced with a piece of plywood sitting in the oval office for the next four years. Being "less bad" than Obama doesn't say much.
2010 really opened my eyes. We had some great victories, but we also had some absolutely repugnant despised liberals win re-election in a "huge Republican year" (Harry Reid, Pat Quinn, Richard Blumenthal, etc.), simply because the well oiled RAT machine outmaneuvered the GOP on the ground, and in many cases we ran lousy candidates and assumed they'd win anyway because it was a Republican year. The RATs can elect completely worthless scum (Al Franken, Todd Stroger, etc.) who would be DOA if they were Republican candidates because the 30% of the country that votes GOP aren't zombie yes-men like the 30% of the country that votes RAT. This gives the RATs an advantage. RAT voters are just plain brain dead and vote for whoever they're told to. I'm afraid 2012 could turn out the same way.
We need a leader and I'm not seeing any on the horizon.
Yeah. I don’t know if you watched “South Park” recently but I feel like Stan Marsh seeing **it everywhere.
My rankings are similar to yours. I’d swap Romney and Newt. Old man Paul is getting senile and has no chance of gaining significant support but he at times looks more attractive to me in this bunch. At least we know he doesn’t have a hardon for big government. Aye-ye-yih. I don’t even now what I think any more!!
Johnson is an across the board libertarian, open borders, pro-choice, drugs, gay marriage. Anyone one of those would be a huge problem for a Republican but all 4!!! It’s no wonder he doesn’t register in the polls. It wouldn’t surprise me if he ends up the Libertarian party nominee.
Huntsman is Obama in whiteface. I wouldn’t vote for that creep but happily I won’t have to make that choice cause he’s gonna come in 8th. I love the vibe I get from him, it’s like he can’t believe that HE’S not the frontrunner.
I hadn’t heard about his daughters. It’s like someone cut Meg McCain the Hutt in three!!
As for Palin, I don’t agree at ALL with the poster of that article. I’ve been disillusioned with her for some time. I think she knew she wouldn’t run a long time ago and don’t see how she could win with her negatives. I don’t care at all whom she endorses (or about anyone’s endorsements really). We saw from the 2010 primaries that her choices were hit and miss.
You don't have to go any further than that. It doesnt matter what MIGHT have happened if she ran, she decided long ago not to run and was waiting for that 'strategic moment to tell us, three days after 'The Undefeated' DVR release to stores. Those Palinistas that were still swaring that she would run when she was commenting on the candidates on Greta on the FNC payroll were either delusional or dishonest.
RE:”My rankings are similar to yours. I’d swap Romney and Newt. :
This morning Joe Scarbouro was making fun of conservative and those that call him a RINO saying Cain like Perry and Bachmann is the latest flavor and Romney will end up with it. He said he ‘knows the Republican party’ better than we do. He has been pushing for Romney for months.
How the hell is Romney going to run against Obama-care? as Levin was pointing out yesterday. ‘Mend it dont end it?”
I’d like to nominate Joe to be the United State’s first ever Ambassador to the Moons of Jupiter. I’m sure there are no shortage of NYC area freepers who would volunteer to drive him down to Cape Canaveral for blastoff.
Javier Bardem, Your Latest Bond Baddie:
http://movies.yahoo.com/blogs/the-projector/javier-bardem-latest-bond-baddie-160045095.html
...gag...
He should be a Batman villain instead, that way he’d at least be in a mask or something.
He’s too sexy for his face. Therefore he should put a paper bag over his head.
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.