[AmericanInTokyo]

Good for you, Donnafrflorida! I came to the same conclusion, over several long months of fact checking, background checking, deliberation, gut level consultation, who can best whup Obama's political ass in the 2012 debates (figuratively speaking of course), sincerity, delivery--in the debates so-far, plan specifics, etc.

The logical conclusion I came to, Freeper, was:

HERMAN CAIN

And people who know me on FR do know I don't generally make such decisions lightly, but only after considerable deliberation, watching these guys (and gal) speak and examining their records, analyzing their "fire in the belly"-level, flip-flop index and the like.

Go Herman Cain!

And enough of these Freepers who are probably already committed to other candidates writing "I like Herman Cain, BUT ("he can't win, he doesnt have experience, yadayadayadayada")" So old hat and tiresome. I wish to h*** they would just zip it and get out of the way if they aren't going to help, but just be naysayers in the peanut gallery.

[HalfFull]

And enough of these Freepers who are probably already committed to other candidates writing "I like Herman Cain, BUT ("he can't win, he doesnt have experience...

I hear you AIT, but how does he get around (this late in the game) not having large numbers of grass root support, name recognition, campaign org in primary states, or source of significant funding to really compete in the primary states? As much as Cain seems like a good choice with conservative ideas, the above things really do matter.