Replies

Oh my goodness. You just basically said you want Romney to be the nominee and Cain to be his V.P., in as many words.

Stop putting words into my mouth.

I DID NOT SAY THAT I WANTED THIS.

I quite clearly said that I DIDN'T THINK IT WOULD HAPPEN.

I am putting this in caps, not because I am shouting, but because I want it to be very clear that I NEVER SAID THAT.

I am asking how, IF this happened, it would be different from McCain/Palin '08.

DO *NOT* TWIST MY WORDS OR MY MEANING. Don't say 'in so many words'. How 'bout you look at the ACTUAL words that I used?

Fair enough then. Still, your question to me has the implied message that even if Romney wins, "isn't that gonna be ok with you??....because we'd V.P. Herman Cain to run in 4 more years." (paraphrasing)

That's essentially what you said.

Now to your Palin question, as she ran with McCain in '08..

Had we CHOSE a conservative as the republican nominee, Palin would be the lesser consideration - not the GREATER.

Are you following the logic here? At this timeline in the primary season, when compared with the timeline of the '08 season, we could have been SMARTER and chose a conservative in the first place. (If we had one) This year we DO.

Stay with me....

Herman Cain cannot sustain himself over the long haul. That may hurt your feelings and be disappointing, but every candidate has to KNOW they need huge amounts of campaign cash to make the long run. He simply doesn't.

My entire point is vote for PERRY because he can win and because he's a fine candidate and a true conservative. Romney is NOT.

We push Romney back, elevate Perry, and Cain is still there if he wanted to run for VP. Which, he apparently doesn't with Perry. Why he said that is beyond me. And also very telling - that he and Romney are in collusion to win as a team.