The allegations against Herman Cain are supported with proof from many sources which have been catalogued time and again on these threads. The proof is not conclusive but I find it persuasive. My judgment is subjective but I have so stipulated. Therefore, it is not fair to charge me with "savaging" Mr. Cain for expressing an opinion or for citing poll numbers. My subjective conclusion is related to the facts and therefore it is rational and within the bounds of fair comment.
Moreover, my opinion is shared by enough of the electorate that Herman Cain's poll numbers have absolutely plummeted.
My reply #143 was in response to an assertion that Gingrich will be subject to attack because of his history. My response is to say that any Republican nominee will will be demagogued and the question is will we have a candidate who can effectively overcome the demagoguery? My argument is that Newt Gingrich is the best equipped in the field to dominate the campaign and overcome this problem.
Do you really want to compare Gingrich's ability to respond to the attacks with Herman Cain's proven inability credibly to respond to the demagoguery?
