Posted on 11/03/2011 11:04:33 AM PDT by RoosterRedux
I don’t know. Frankly, as I just posted, I think that one of the things that SP didn’t like was the cult of personality. I think she wants to be a legitimate candidate, based on ideas and programs and not a cult figure. But she had definitely verged on being a cult figure like Cain.
I was really afraid that some people here were going to commit suicide the night that she said she was not running. That’s not a good thing.
We’re looking for ideas and competence, not personalities.
I think she wants to run on her ideas, but she couldn’t do so because she had built up such a cult following. Maybe now that she’s been out of the public view for awhile, she might be able to come back.
LOL—yeah, I’ve been called some names, and one woman even suggested southerners in general, and Texans in particular, are ignorant knuckle-draggers (unlike the enlightened folk in her NJ area). I’ve seen freepers turn on one another like this. I worry that it bodes ill for the Republican ticket in 2012.
I almost quit commenting for awhile, but you’re right. I’m not sure silence helps in this case. Maybe if more people stand up for the fine old FR tradition of vetting, questioning, researching—all done civilly of course—maybe things will improve. It’s one thing to think someone’s favorite candidate is a jerk, but it’s quite another to call the freeper who supports him or her a jerk simply because of their support.
I think that’s a factor. You are definitely on to something there.
But what do we do now?
Do you see Cain recovering from this?
And I don’t mean the bogus accusations. I mean the ineptitude he is displaying under pressure.
They'll double-down or just ignore this turn of events and go back to attacking anyone who isn't Cain on thread after thread.
That said, if his career is filled with damaging stuff...he should have know better than to get into politics.
I guess we'll have to wait to find out if his enemies can do him in.
[I’ve seen freepers turn on one another like this.]
Since I usually used to just post my graphics I didn’t have that happening. But now I see so many lies and even when you post facts and links they call you names.
Frankly, half of them aren’t even up on the facts of an event, it amazes me. -—or else they deliberately play dumb.
I stayed off of Palin threads for two years to avoid trouble and now when I like a candidate I get called names. Like you, I research and find facts before posting.
[I am getting slammed myself but not backing down.]
Good for you Katie! Maybe I’m naive but was never used to people outright lying and it gets me down.
Cain't problem of being "misrepresented" is with Herman Cain.
Thanks to all of your for your posts. It’s nice to know others share my feelings. There are some awesome people on this site whose opinions I respect. Sometimes I agree with them, sometimes I don’t but I always enjoy their analysis. Sometimes they move me to change my mind. It’s not the same these days, people are on the offensive and rude and belligerent. Very little articulate or intelligent discourse anymore. You can’t have a civil conversation with them and agree to disagree. If you don’t agree with them you are met with hostility and insults. A lot of us don’t like it. I know we are free to leave but I am stubborn and would prefer to work to make it better.
There are more of us than you think. Today someone called me a troll, almost a liar and accused me of smearing facts. It is only fair that all candidates are vetted and the truth comes our for the good of our country. Yes, there are some fantastic folks on this site with open minds and intelligent reponses..have to focus on them...lol lol lol but sometimes I lose my irish temper
I agree with you McLynnan, and as Katie said “There are more of us than you think” who feel this way.
Are you saying the pros whom you love so much did not bring us The Usurping Marxist Onada? Are you really saying these people will get us out of the mess they got us in?
Frankly, I’m up to here with pros. The trouble with political pros is they have no core values. Their one and only concern is reelection. They will promise anything, lie, cheat and steal to maintain there primary and secondary positions at the public trough.
By the way, who’re these wonderful pros you adore so much? I’d like some names. And then tell me exactly what they have accomplished that’s positive for America?
They seem culpable because of their lack of spine in this matter to me. They seem to be enjoying their “fellow” Republican get accused of vague charges. Perry and Romney seem to have forgotten that we are fighting a bigger fight than amongst each other.
Why don’t you say that about Santorum, Bachman, Gingrich, Paul, Huntsman, and Johnson? What about their “lack of spine” as you say? Why single out only Perry and Romney. In fact Santorum has outright attacked Cain over this matter, and Bachman has obliquely done so also. Funny how you selectively accuse only two out of the entire Pub field of not coming to Cain’s aid. Cain is a big boy. He can figure out how to handle this, and if he can’t, then he’s not ready for prime time.
“It’s not the same these days, people are on the offensive and rude and belligerent. Very little articulate or intelligent discourse anymore. You can’t have a civil conversation with them and agree to disagree. If you don’t agree with them you are met with hostility and insults. A lot of us don’t like it.”
Bingo, and ditto.
Dunno...Bill Clinton in 2007-08 campaign called Obama 'a fantasy'. Look what happened---from fantasy to nightmare. We will take the 'Cain fad' anytime in comparison.
” Cain’t problem of being “misrepresented” is with Herman Cain. “
Agreed .
It’s hard to imagine that Block doesn’t confer with Cain
before making announcements.
The Cain campaign has become the gang that couldn’t shoot straight.
Cain today contradicted Block’s walk back on Perry
and reiterated on Hannity
that he is convinced the leaks
came from the Perry.
The whole focus on the leaks is a red herring.
Just like when the Democrats went berserk and tried to provide cover
for Clinton by blaming Lucianne Goldberg and
Linda Tripp for leaking about Lewinsky.
Leaking information is different than making something
up out of whole cloth.
The fact is that two women accused Cain of inappropriate behavior.
And were paid off by the NRA .
One for 30k and the other received 40-45k.
The original Politico story reported on a possible third case ,
unrelated to the woman who spoke to the AP yesterday.
“Cain, .....did tell at least one campaign staffer this year
about the possibility that claims of sexual harassment could surface,
according to the aide.
Cain, ...., described a case in which he fired an employee in 1990s
and the woman alleged sexual misconduct
or harassment.
Cain told the campaign staffer he had won the case
and that the woman had paid his legal fees.
The aide had no further details. “
This case sounds like it was a court case or some type of litigation
which Cain said he won,
separate from the two settlement cases.
How could Cain have ever imagined these cases
would have remained hidden
in a presidential election ?
Honestly, I don't think he did believe they would remain hidden. Watching him these many months, looking for clues for his ability to handle the presidency, I was often puzzled that he sounded like a man who did not really want to be president. I can't recall exactly what he said, but several times he made statements that indicated he would not win the election. So i drew my own conclusions that he was running for VP. I think he has been more surprised than anybody that he became the front runner.
What’s this “walks back Perry accusations”. What a weird choice of words. I didn’t even know what that meant.
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.