Posted on 05/23/2011 9:43:59 PM PDT by Kartographer
Herman Cain leads presumed frontrunner Mitt Romney as the top choice of Republican primary voters in the race for the 2012 Presidential nomination. Among all voters, no one in a list of 13 possible GOP candidates leads President Barack Obama.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
I’m saying that being the Chair of the KC Fed is an elite establishment credential.
I’m saying that country club republicans, Romney supporters, would appreciate this elite credential.
This is not an insult, although it might, sorta, mess up Cain’s calculation as to where he might find voters.
He has a good resume. I’m not saying a bad resume, I’m saying a good resume. That good resume contains one very good elite credential (Chair of KC Fed) that Romney supporters, or Pawlenty supporters, or Santorum supporters, or any of that group, might appreciate. That’s a complement to Cain for being able to put an elite credential on his resume that would appeal to establishment Republicans. That’s all me complementing Cain, not attacking him. Good job Cain! You have a resume that will appeal to establishment Republicans. Good job!
With the “completely self-made man” and the rest, sure, another part of his resume.
That’s not trashing him.
More than half of the Republican field can’t possibly win because they’re not famous enough.
Pointing out that most Republicans don’t know someone is not trashing that person. It’s just a fact.
It’s a fact that it’s been many many years (actually I don’t know how many) since the Republicans picked someone who was not famous as their Presidential Nominee.
Those things that you mention are most certainly the kinds of things that many Republicans won’t like.
But, you have to be well known.
Ron Paul is well known, as is Palin, Gingrich, Romney, and Bachmann (barely).
Palin is the best known and the best liked, and would have to be seen as the front runner.
But those 5 are the only 5 who are well known enough to win.
do you support closing down military bases around the world? If so— help me out. My concern is not that we don’t have troops in Germany— I am fine with no troops in Germany, Japan, etc.... But in today’s world it gives me pause for 2 reasons....
1) it leaves us logistically at a great disadvantage if we need to act quickly against REAL threats (not libyan uprisings).
2) it leaves us at a great disadvantage on intel gathering...I am sure these bases have extensive intel technology monitoring communications in there region....
Would love to hear your thoughts on those..
There is a third much more dire concern.
The Libertarian tenet against "Non-Initiation of Force" would twist Ron Paul into an incapacitating moral conundrum, preventing his use of our nuclear deterrent at the most critical moment with grave consequences.
We do not need another President that will telegraph his cowardice and fecklessness to all of our enemies. One this Century is already to much.
What did "Right of Return" mean to you?
To most knowledgeable individuals, it was the "Right of Return" of the Jewish people to leave their refuge found in other parts around The Globe after the Diaspora and return to the Holy Land. That is the only "Right of Return" that I was ever aware of.
This so called "Right of Return" that Mike Wallace referred to is an Islamo-fascist construct intended to destroy Israel. The term is a disingenuous Gotcha Question in the US because it was accepted into the history books since 1950. I would give Pallies the right to return to their ancient crypts in Mecca.
I'm all confused by your post now. The last that I knew, Justice Thomas has been a sitting Conservative Associate Justice of the Supreme Court for the past twenty years. Furthermore, he will be there for life or as long as he wishes.
Your statement suggesting Herman Cain should expect a treatment similar to that experienced by Clarence Thomas, must be construed to mean he will win the 2012 election after a hard and valiant struggle.
Clear your murky thoughts and try to organize your mind before you set finger to they keys again.
I didn't realize until this moment you were on the the airwaves, I will go back and listen to your work. I'm sure I have heard you before, but never knew you were EC on FR. I especially want to listen to your conversion with David Chastain, a very Baptist Libertarian.
Speaking of very devout men of faith, I suspect you knew Royal Marshall? There have been very few media people I would cry for.
Of the two mistakes, the "Right of Return" question is a smaller issue in my mind. Mr. Cain has admitted that he hadn't heard the term, but having his mind go blank on hearing a question would not look so bad to me. We all have our minds go blank at a question occasionally. To me, the bigger issue is his failure to have educated himself enough to give us some idea of what he'd do in Afghanistan.
I understand that he doesn't have access to all of the intelligence on this topic, but plenty of experts have written books and journal articles. He could have read these books and articles and come up with some ideas. As a prominent man in talk radio and to some extent in GOP circles, he could call these people and ask them to educate him in more depth. They couldn't tell him secret information that they had learned in government service, but they could help him put together a guideline for a policy. If he had given us this guideline, we could see how he approaches the problem. He could even preface his answer with a promise to take a fresh look when he was in office to be sure that important facts wouldn't dictate another course. We care about the answers to these questions because they speak to the preparation that the candidate has done and the thought process that he will bring to the office.
It would have seemed a normal question or topic half a Century ago. As it stands now, Mike Wallace used duplicitous Ilamo-fascist newspeak to give wildly rabid liberals a weapon to attack Herman Cain.
As for Afghanistan, do some historical investigation and then seriously tell us again you want someone to give a soundbite answer to perhaps the most difficult foreign policy problem that we have faced in our current times.
Herman Cain answered the question the way Ronald Reagan would have answered. He would gather the best people to counsel him and go on to develop a plan from there. Why did you not appreciate that honest answer?
I suggest we let him began gathering his advisers and futher developing program plans in the course of his campaign before expecting him to tell all he knows before his run has even begun.
“As it stands now, Mike Wallace used duplicitous Ilamo-fascist newspeak”
Right of return most certainly is one of the propaganda catch phrases associated with the Palestinian Arabs. It’s just not a term Jews currently use (Israelis of course use the term “Aliyah” to describe immigration), so maybe you’re right, and that would have still been a snappy comeback to turn it.
Palestinians are the only people with eternal refugee status, even while holding visas, and sometimes citizenship in multiple countries. Also, the Palestinian Papers leaked by AL Jazeera revealed the PA has no expectations they’ll consume the Arab population claiming right of return after they get statehood. Proof of that is the refugee camp in Jordan full of former Gaza Arabs who are being denied the right to return by their own leadership, even though Gaza is in Arab hands.
The man has had over ten years to prepare for his presidential run. Either he hasn't bothered to prepare or he hasn't prepared effectively. No one is asking him to establish a complete policy in a sound byte. We are asking him to show that he's done some preparation before running for president.
Cain has been doing well in Zogby polls. He was second in a mid-May poll.
Don’t know why Zogby is including Christie (not running).
Gallup has Cain at 8%. That puts him ahead of T-Paw and Bachmnan.
He may just have a chance to be a major contender.
Nice comparison.
Forbes though, I wish he had won.
True, and in the Gallup poll, Cain has the highest positive intensity of any candidate.
Impy, you obviously didn’t see my post from a couple of days ago on a thread where this “news” was first reported:
“I love Herman Cain, but before anyone starts crowing about this “poll,” please keep in mind that
THIS IS NOT A SCIENTIFIC POLL
IT IS AN INTERNET SURVEY OF SELF-SELECTED PARTICIPANTS WHO SIGNED UP TO ANSWER POLL QUESTIONS FOR ZOGBY
While all polls should be taken with a grain of salt, this does not even meet the minimum criteria to be considered a poll, and there isn’t enough salt in the Dead Sea to make this result palatable.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2724536/posts?page=22#22
No, I didn’t.
That explains it.
Well, don’t feel too bad—NewsMax tends to bend the truth to say what it wants to say (usually what we want to hear).
But the Gallup polls are real polls, so there’s some good news in the Cain front that is on the up-and-up.
I don’t feel bad cause I didn’t believe Cain could possibly be in first. ;)
Ahead of him in the gallup poll was Myth, Palin, Grinch, and Ron Paul. The latter 2 within the MOE.
3 unelectable losers and Palin who I don’t think will run.
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.