Mitt Romney is "the best hope for a good president who could turn out to be great."---Herman Cain
Posted on 11/05/2011 9:50:57 AM PDT by TitansAFC
In a February 2008, Herman Cain used his syndicated column to endorse a candidate in the Republican primary.
His choice?
Mitt Romney.
The former Massachusetts governor struck Cain as best equipped to "focus on the right problems" and make the "tough decisions" to solve them: "Romney has done that as a chief executive officer in business, as a governor and as head of the U.S. Olympics," Cain wrote, adding the noteworthy judgment that "he has done so while balancing political consequences, but not compromising fundamental principles of the founding of this country or free-market economics." Romneycare apparently wasn't seen as a deal-breaker or a compromise of core principles circa 2008.
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
Well Herman is running against him today.
He obviously does not think so now.
Back then every one was focused on stopping McCain.
The GOP establishment gave us Obama.
Cain was in some good company at the time, jim demint, mark levin, etc, etc,
CAIN - A GREAT PRESIDENT
Obviously you preferred John McCain. By February 2008, all the conservatives had been eliminated and we were down to holding our noses and voting for the lesser of evils, but, as long as we are rewriting history ....
How true
I was in the GOP in MA when Romney was guv. Believe me, Romneycare wasn’t the only blemish to his record.
And for anyone who says he’s got the needed executive skills from his private sector experience, the simple question is, then why was he such a poor governor?
Doesn’t exactly sound like Cain was “settling.”
-—”Anyone who wishes to find a reason not to vote for Romney can easily find one. But the reasons to vote for him are far more compelling. “-—
-—”Mitt Romney’s leadership credentials offer the best hope of a leader with substance, and the best hope for a good president who could turn out to be great.””-—
-—he has done so while balancing political consequences, but not compromising fundamental principles of the founding of this country or free-market economics.” (Romneycare apparently wasn’t seen as a deal-breaker or a compromise of core principles circa 2008).-—
Neither has any significance - the world changed forever on about 1/20/2009.
Huckabee was still around, too. Just saying.
I once liked Mittens for how he handled the Olympics, too, and thought he could be a good President. But, now, after learning more about him? Can’t stand him.....he is like a stepford husband and a democrat/socialist.
I hope people can remember that when it pertains to candidates not named “Herman Cain,” Mygirlsmom.
Cain’s support for Romney is a big concern I have always had. He has a wire loose somewhere.
When Romney first started to run in 2008, he had a widespread reputation as a savvy businessman who had saved the Salt Lake City Olympics. People didn’t click that he saved it, typically, by getting a great big federal grant.
Also, I remember having to fight with a lot of Freepers who supported him back then. Having to point out, again and again, that he had a record of being pro-abortion and pro-gay-marriage while governor of Massachusetts. Had to say it every day, because it wasn’t widely known or admitted.
The full extent of his lies and flip flops took years to come out. Meantime, there were not a whole lot of other good candidates to choose from. Fred Thompson was unable to overcome the media blackout, and even Fred had some doubtful points, such as his close friendship with Juan McCain. So, the other choices were guys like Huckabee and Giuliani—widely known as pro-gay and pro-abortion.
Need I repeat myself?
And I'd like to introduce my Vice Presidential pick.
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.