Posted on 10/14/2011 5:40:45 AM PDT by IbJensen
Karl Rove doesnt think Herman Cain stands a chance of being POTUS. Bushs number one consigliere said as much on Fox Thursday night.
But is he right? I sure dont know, but I certainly have a suspicion why Karl thinks what he does. The Herman Cain candidacy is a direct threat to his occupation. Rove arguably the reigning monarch of political pros went on to register his disapproval that Cain was wandering around Godforsaken places like Tennessee flogging his book, when any serious candidate should be pressing the flesh where it counts to wit, Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.
Worse yet, the candidate isnt raising any money (or not enough to have flashing neon signs that say 9 9 9 like Burma-Shave along every highway in America not that we have to be reminded).
Now I have no beef with Rove. In fact, I rather like him, having interviewed him for PJTV. But its obvious that times have changed and that Herman Cain is running a very canny media campaign virtually all by himself. Yes, I know he has a staff, but you do get the sense this man is his own thing, which is part of the tightrope walking fun. Can he make it to the other side Pennsylvania Avenue without falling? Whatever the case, Rove and others like him (the sorry David Axelrod, the Carville-Matalin duo, etc.) are in danger of becoming, if not extinct, at least more marginal than previously assumed.
Heres another data point: A couple of months back, Newt Gingrichs entire campaign staff including Dave Carney, the putative next Karl Rove split and decamped for Texas, soon to join Rick Perrys campaign. What happened? Today Gingrich is rising in the polls apparently on the strength of his debate performances and Perry, who started strong, is, at least for now, in trouble.
Again, I have no beef with Carney. Ive met him too and he seems to be a fine fellow. Quite bright.
So whats going on here? The more powerful the political pros, the worse the campaign? Or is it really about the candidate in our non-stop media world? I tend to think its the latter. Given the amount of coverage they all get, its hard to imagine they need help in getting exposure. Maybe they need help in getting a little anonymity. (Thats particularly true in the current presidents case.)
And what about money the legendary mothers milk of politics? Well, it too might not be as important as it is cracked up to be. Cain, as noted, has spent very little (at least until now) and Jon Huntsman is the richest guy to run since, well, John Kerry. Maybe Huntsmans even richer. And look where its got him, duking it out with Rick Santorum for the privilege of keeping Gary Johnson out of the debates (unfairly, in my estimation).
We may all hate our media they are even less popular than politicians but they are ironically diminishing the importance of money in politics. No money? No pros? Whats next? Actual democracy?
Of course, I have overstated it, but I think not by a lot. What also may be going on is that the American public at least on the Republican side is very engaged. They know we are in a crisis and they are paying strict attention. They dont need pros and they dont need advertising to attract their eyes. Their bank accounts already woke them up and if not that, a friendly reminder from the neighborhood jihadist.
Does this mean that the candidates should all strip down and fire their advisers? (Be like Herman, not like Mike.) Well, in one sense, that wouldnt be a bad idea. But in these dire economic times, with everyone so concerned about jobs, putting all those political pros on the unemployment lines could be heartless. And no candidate Rick Perry would be glad to remind you wants to be accused of that.
That depends on how you turn it. Counter-clockwise, it becomes a 6. Clockwise, it becomes a (sort of) lowercase ‘a’.
MY GUY RULEZ - YOUR GUY DROOLZ!!!!! times a bazillion
PS: Herman Cain is also a politician, but he is a failed politician as he ran for public office and lost.
Your ignorance is showing....and let me explain why.
First, Cain was much more than Godfather's CEO...he held many other positions of leadership which qualifies him as leader of the executive branch.
But let's focus on his CEO experience.
Since you diminish his leaership at Godfather's Pizza, you clearly do not understand what a CEO actually does.
I thought only liberals believed CEOs just sit around and watch the stock price.
CEOs do much, much more than a general in the military.....and they do it with far fewer resources.
CEOs do not know how to do every job inside a company....they hire the right people for those jobs.
CEOs do not work alone. They bring in a leadership team who advises them.
CEOs set the overall strategy in conjunction with those executives.
Cain did not come up with 9-9-9 on his own, he went to economists. That is what a great leader does.
Being President is a leadership role. You want someone who knows how to put together great teams and someone who sets a clear, attainable set of goals that they will achieve.
I recall Rove being an adviser to Bush, but never a 'spokesman.' Bush's spokespersons were Karen Hughes, Ari Flischer, Tony Snow (God rest his soul) and that really incompetent Scott McClellan. All were pretty good other than McClellan who was in way over his head.
As to not responding to some of the mud slung by the democrats, that was Bush's style. He refused to get down in the mud. He wanted to keep it classy. I don't think it is fair to 'blame' the lack of response on anyone but Bush.
I'm sorry, turning every person, including your babysitter and lemonaid stand operator into a sales tax collecting agent for the federal government is WAY too much government participation in every activity in life.
It is bad enough I need to chronicle the aggregate of each quarter year of my life to the Fe'ral Government, but Cain wants each and every financial transaction to be public record with every i and j dotted and t crossed or face the violent and punitive police powers of the ever present State.
Furthermore, are you prepared to pay an additional 9% on your next house or car? Most people have a devil of a time conjuring up the 20% to satisfy the mortgage broker - how about coming up with an additional 9% - at the time of purchase - just to satisfy the Washington Monster?
Now extrapolate this to industry. If any capital improvement has an additional 9% toll placed on it that must be paid up front, how does that work out for a billion dollar energy facility, chemical plant or semiconductor fab?
Talk about forcing the manufacturing industry out of the country by levying a pay-to-play fee of 9% of total assessed value. Then because of the flat tax, NONE of it can be deducted for depreciation which really sucks when the startup isn't destined to make any profit for the first couple of years. They still have to pay the tax despite profitability. Yet another way to crush startups and expansion in the US.
Cain would be a bulldozer smoothing out the remaining standing wreckage of an economy following the wrecking ball and ANFO used by our government to Cloward/Pivens the existing one.
We don't need an encore to this botched performance.
Seriously man, stop the joke. You are way overrating the importance of a CEO of Godfather Pizza with sales revenues around $ 300 million and as I said the toughest decision he made is to open and close a Pizza joint here or there and whether to reduce and increase the price of Pizza.
Regarding the 9-9-9 tax plan, it is a tax increase on 50% of the people, i.e. it is insanity.
I respectfully request that you articulate your alternative tax plan since Mr. Cain's does not meet your approval.
You may be right. That one is before my political consciousness, but I am aware of the basic history you outlined.
It would do the Tea Party a lot of good in the meantime to get some people elected Governor in some statehouses, get a track record in republican government. The Oval Office should not be an entry-level position.
You show an incredible ignorance about what the CEO of a substantial corporation does, but put that aside. Even if people agreed with you about Cain's experience, who would we be left with? Certainly not Perry or Romney who have no experience in foreign affairs and their being governors historically is a very strong negative indication for being a good president.
The only ones left would be Gingrich or Paul. Do you really think the Republicans should endorse Paul or Gingrich?
Our Country was not set up to be "ruled" by professional politicians. Unfortunately we did not heed the warnings of our Founders and find ourselves burdened with an incredibly huge, oppressive central government. The only thing that will change it is good people from outside the corruption that is Washington, and people who have experience "turning around" failing organizations are especially valuable.
You can elect people like Jimmy Carter over and over again because of their "executive experience" but the result will be the same and it would be "insane" to do it. I'll take my chances with a smart, experienced, principled outsider like Herman Cain.
First and foremost, I do not introduce a new tax like the national sales tax. Second, 0% income tax on every dollar up to $ 50,000, 15% income tax on every dollar from $ 50,001 to $ 500,000, and 20% income tax above $ 500,001. Third, Corporate tax rates would be cut depending on the sector. Manufacturing, agriculture, high tech, retail, and healthcare sectors would pay 15% in corporate tax. Financial sector would pay 25% in corporate tax.
I like that. What's worse is that they not only don't solve problems they generate problems, sometimes huge ones like the sub-prime mortgage fiasco that almost destroyed our economy. The best way for a politician to solve problems is to pass bills getting the government out of peoples faces.
I don't see your notion that every person is a tax collection agent.
Instead, we'd all be tax payers, all paying the same rate, ending the tax discrimination we have now.
I'm not saying the 999 plan's rates are exactly what we need. I'm sure the devil in the details (as Bachmann said) would need to be worked out long before such tax reform would land on the President's desk to be signed or vetoed.
Regardless, Cain's idea is a better than what we have now and if nothing else, we're talking about tax reform instead of 'taxing the rich' like we usually do.
Um, no. Flipping something upside down is called a flip. Turning something upside is called "turning it upside down." Thus the act of turning affects the end result.
It's totally subjective, FRiend.
Are we talking about Perry? I thought this thread was about Herman Cain.
So you want to keep a progressive income tax, one of the hallmarks of Marxism, a complicated corporate tax system that Congress can use to choose the winners and you want low income earners to have representation without taxation, which is what has gotten us to the miserable state we are now.
You know this is a conservative website, correct?
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.