Posted on 11/05/2011 3:16:26 PM PDT by blueyon
Republican 2012 presidential candidates Republican 2012 presidential candidates Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich met in a Lincoln-Douglas style debate on current economic and social issues facing the U.S.
I realize people disagree regarding the "factuallness" of what I say. But I care about the truth, which is why I both ask people to point out exactly what they think is wrong in what I post, and why I spend so much time explaining my position when my facts are questioned -- because if I've made a mistake, I want to know about it and correct it. I want to make my own informed decision about a candidate. I don't "love" any candidate, nor am I related to any candidate, which means I'm not "invested" in any candidate.
In that regard, I did appreciate your bringing up the profit question. That was the type of thing which could change my argument. I was short with you about that last night, and I apologize -- I had already been through that before, so it wasn't in fact new to me, but you would have no way of knowing and it was a helpful addition to the evidence pool.
Anyway, to summarize -- you may read or not read. Another freeper was questioned as to their statement that Cain's CEO'ship wasn't as hot as some say, and I held a similar view, and stated that view. I was questioned as to the facts I stated, and as to whether I had taken into account other measurements, so I offered a detailed response showing what I had taken into consideration. As I have taken a lot into consideration, the resulting post was very long. I thank you for your interest, and for helping me seek the truth.
No. Those are easy enough to find. Students must attend high school, and get a B average. If they do, and they qualify for admission to a Texas public school, they would have access through their high school to the forms they would fill out to apply for in-state tuition.
On that form, they are told what they need to affirm in order to qualify for tuition.
There would be no need for any identification program to find and offer the benefit to the students. If they qualify they are in a position to get that information already.
I will say two things. First, I care little about polls at this point. Second, I doubt he will lose Texas if he is still in the race when they have their primary.
OK, I tried so hard to be succinct there that I cut off my own post.
I am trying to do three things for Perry: 1) correct factual misrepresentations. 2) put the real issues people have with a few of his actions in context. 3) Dissuade people from abandoning Perry simply because his poll numbers are low.
I’ve got no beef with people who don’t want Perry. Everybody has to make their own choices. I think we could do that without all the snide comments and childish namecalling, but whatever. I do want people to make that decision with the best evidence available. Thats a much for me as anybody. When someone posts something negative about a candidate, I go research it. If it’s true, I want to know; if it is false, or just misleading, I need to know that as well, and feel others should also care.
So I have a particular disdain for posters who attack me when I try to correct something I see as wrong, by telling me Perry is toast so I’m hurting people by defending him (not you — just a random observation).
“I will say two things. First, I care little about polls at this point. Second, I doubt he will lose Texas if he is still in the race when they have their primary.”
He’ll be out of the race but technically still in... running for VP for RINO Romney.
He’s done...under 10% in all national polls...6% IN IOWA.
Losing to Cain in Texas.
I was simply doing to you, in jest, exactly what you had done to me (and others) in condescension and in seriousness. You lashed out at me for it, and I replied with an explanation of the fact that it was your bad behavior to blame for the whole mess.
Again......an apology from you will end it all. Oh.....and no more snarky, condescension from you in the future wouldn't hurt either. A whole lot more people that just me have seen the underside of your nose looking down on them for disagreeing with you.
It's not a pretty sight, Charles.
If I didn't think you were a decent person underneath it all, I would just ignore you (as has been recommended), but in the end, you and I are going to have to work together to get rid of Obama, and that might mean your setting aside your intense distaste for Herman Cain and your mission to belittle everyone who doesn't share it.
That's a mighty tall order, and I'm glad it's a task that I haven't chosen to shoulder.
Most people commenting on this board have looked at Perry with their own two eyes, and have found him lacking in too many ways to seriously consider giving him their support. As a staunch Perry supporter, that's something you simply have to face.
You may be willing to give him a pass on his transgressions against conservative principles, and forgive him his failures to achieve the sort of things that conservatives are looking for in someone with his long tenure, but most other people aren't.
Look at it this way. Most people have an internal laundry list of things they look for in a candidate, and subconsciously grade each candidate on each of those points, as the individual candidates conduct their campaigns. It doesn't take long for the average person to gravitate toward that candidate who scores the highest on their list of qualifications. Conversely, they move further away from those candidates who score the poorest, in their estimation.
Perry's poll numbers (as well as the rest of the candidates) are merely a reflection of what's occurred in the minds of countless voters during this primary race. He has simply failed to sell himself as a viable candidate to most people watching the race, and his poor poll numbers reflect that.
I've read lots of your posts about Rick Perry, and for my money, you're doing a better job of selling him, than he is. At this stage, I don't know if he's got the capability to sell himself any better than he has, and let's not forget the fact that it's almost impossible to get voters back, once they've abandoned you.
Like I said, it's a tall order.
My apology stands.
Good luck to you, Charles.
This is the ONLY kind of debate forum run by REAL conservative organization and moderators for conservative candidates who want to and are able to talk about REAL issues.
I haven’t paid close enough attention to the dynamics of all the threads to form my own observation as to whether what you say is true or not.
BUT if there is an obsession in attacking Perry, there also is evidently an obsession in defending him. You may find that the latter is more reasonable than the other, but I find them equally worthy of avoiding.
You say if Perry is toast, there is no reason to attack him. Well, yes and no.
I’m not advocating it, but I think you have to agree that so long as he is in the race AND — unlike Huntsman — has (or may have) the favor of the big donors who could try to crank up his candidacy at any time — he could be seen as the worst of all things: a potential spoiler. He also could be viewed as continuing to suck of oxygen when, if he’s toast, that’s a big waste.
IOW, there’s toast and then there’s toast that can cause trouble without any potential for benefitting the process. Huntsman, thus, is “harmless” toast; he has and can have zero impact on the race. But maybe Perry is toast that can still gum up the works, mainly because he might still (however reluctantly) get the Romney elites to turn to him when they finally realize Romney can’t win.
The problem with that is that most in the base have concluded that Perry STILL could not win the nomination. Therefore, even if the elites go full-on for him, all that will happen is he will prolong the process until we get a nominee (who, again, will not be Perry).
OTOH, if you think Perry is NOT toast, why the absolute obsession with defending him?
As far as those seemingly obsessed with defending Perry, I’m not sure who they think their audience is. It’s clear that there are a lot of people in the base who just don’t like the guy. That is not changeable by people jawboning at them that they SHOULD like the guy or that it’s UNFAIR that they dislike that. That fact is only changeable BY PERRY.
So unless and until Perry changes the minds of people who just don’t like them (which they are perfectly entitled to not like him), the obsessive Perry supporters risk putting people off more. That’s just the way it is: it’s a social dynamic that is inevitable.
If the obsessive Perry supporters are hoping they are spurring on the elites to go big in supporting Perry as the anti-Romney, the elites are not reading FR. So, see the problem above.
As far as I’m concerned, the solution is to ignore, so far as possible, BOTH obsessive attacks and obsessive defenses.
I in no way said or believe that Cain did not believe his endorsement.
I said his endorsement was tepid and mainly because it was between Romney and McCain.
That in no way implies that I believe Cain didn’t believe, however reluctantly or for whatever pragmatic reasons, that at that time Romney was the better candidate, given the choices.
Ok, we’ll know soon enough. You’ll be welcome if you change your mind.
The deterioration of this thread into backbiting and insults (after the very enlightening discussion between Cain and Gingrich) is why I NEVER recommend FR to others.
I post informed opinion. I freely admit that I may miss a nit here or a grit there. But my big picture is almost always on the money. Perry did not even show up on the list of Pubbie/conservative candidates in the latest Newsmax survey.
Real conservatives are backing Cain. He reaped more than a million dollars last week—at the height of the Perry, Romney, RINO, GOP and demrat GOP controllers lynching attempt. A little of that was my money. I will be sending him some more.
Wow, I’ve seen more than a few insipid remarks here, but that one takes the cake. Sounds like you’re one of the losers who couldn’t change and got left by the wayside. Sorry about that....but really, comments like that make you sound pretty stupid to anyone who knows anything about the subject.
Hank
If, as you declare without a shred of proof, the Governor would say anything to get elected, why isn’t he saying that in state tuition was a bad, Democrat, pandering law? He could just point to the fact that it passed with a veto-proof margin, twice, and blame the Legislature.
Now, for the Senator (who ran against him last year, and then couldn’t meet with Texans who visited DC for at least a month after her defeat in the Primary):
Kay Bailey Hutchison is not prolife, so she and her staff don’t like me very much because I keep urging her to be the one pro-life woman in the Senate.
And are you sure that she was talking about the same “endorsement” the interviewer was talking about?
Even before we clashed over Hutchison’s endorsement of embryonic stem cell research, I used to write letters or make phone calls, and even visited her office a couple of times in DC, to encourage her to vote for this Bill or against that Bill. I would get back form letters that had nothing to do with what I’d written or called about.
She and her staff ignored my invitations to meet with the National Advisory Committee on Violence Against Women (not “no,” ignored) and once sent a letter to my office, addressed to”Dr. ___” on the envelope but inside was a letter on a Medical issue (but not the one I had written her office about) and it was addressed to “Dear Mrs. ____.” (I’m happy to be “Mrs.” much longer than I’ve been “Dr.,” but she messed up the subject and the letter came to my office.)
Needless to say, I’m not impressed with Mrs. Hutchison.
"Frankly, if it's 'Perry's stance,' then he should be thanking Cain and Gingrich for speaking it for him, since he obviously can't articulate anything for himself."
Wish I'd have thought of that myself!
and
"But now, after seeing that my Shetland Sheepdog could do better in a debate than Perry..."
I propose that Texas Tea Party sponsor another one of these events: My Yorkie against your Shetland Sheepdog. Your Sheepdog may be smart but my Yorkie is cunning and relentless!
Hank
As long as she is against Perry, that’s good enough for the anti-Perry flash mob!
In the case of our own facility, we were about 70 people when we started. We're now at about 100. We got better, we got more customer-focussed, and we got more business. We're the only facility in our division that added people in this time. There's a fallacy that it's about mindlessly cutting heads, and that just isn't the case. Not when done by people who know what they're doing.
Hank
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.