Taking the country back, one talking point at a time
Ijust caught it on the news. five minutes of Cain trying to chase down any recollection of Libya and whether he supported Obama's efforts. I loved it when he knee jerked an answer that no he did not agree, oh, wait, that was the other thing.It was hilarious.
Funny, in a sad sort of way. First his thing about China's nukes, and now this. Well, the conservatives still have Mitt and Newt, I guess. 8-)
I can't wait for new dirt on Newt. His stuff is usually pretty raunchy.
You know, I don't feel the least bit sad for Cain. He had no business running for president.
I know what you mean, J. I guess it just saddens me when I see someone so full of hubris as Cain or Perry, when most people except themselves can see how far from perfect they are. I find it can be a tragic kind of thing when anyone can be so stupid yet be so cocksure. I hope neither Cain nor Perry gets any higher up the political food chain than they are now. They both represent a very bad mixture of religion and testosterone, and that is usually never a good mix.
And now the guy has come out in support of the bargaining rights of public employees. I don't think he knows what he supports or believes, and he's just trying to score points with independents.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/14/herman-cain-collective-bargaining_n_1093418.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009Gee righties, I guess maybe Cain is not your guy after all. Heh!
I'd be more comfortable with Obama getting that 3 a.m. call than Cain getting it any day.
I'd rather have a "regular guy" myself. Clinton was oh so famously a Rhodes scholor, Bush went to Yale and Harvard, Obama went to Harvard. We haven't had much luck with these Ivy League people.
The GOP has a golden opportunity to beat Obama, and it looks to me like they are throwing it away by running out unelectable candidates. I don't know that it matters where someone went to college. If they don't have facts from which to work when it comes to foreign policy, I don't want them taking the "3 a.m. call".
If that was true Snave you wouldn't have voted for Obama.
Jim, if you really want to see something painfull you go to youtube and punch in Obama can't talk without a script and Obama the bumbling idiot. Why do you and the media ignore Obama's screw ups?
Because Obama screws up verbally about one tenth of one percent of the time. Hey, it's not just me. The public recognizes Perry and Cain are just a couple of ill-advised blowhards. And I am sure Newt will self-destruct pretty soon now that's his poll numbers have risen.
Free, I preferred the thought of Obama taking the 3 a.m. call to the thought of McCain taking it. There is no way of telling what the situation could be in such cases, but my thought was that McCain's reaction to a number of situations could well be to simply push the red button without much forethought. And had he been elected and perished in office, the thought of his successor in such a situation was mortifying.The GOP is losing its chance to beat Obama in a similar way to how they lost their chance to beat Clinton in 1996. It might have been a win for the Republicans then, had they actually had an electable candidate. As it turned out, Clinton was simply stronger. And so far, Obama is simply a stronger candidate than Perry, Cain, or Gingrich. The tide hasn't really started turning yet, but I suspect it will. Lots of people don't like Obama, it's true. But once it gets to be crunch time and they more seriously consider the alternatives, greater numbers of voters will choose to vote for him. Romney might be a different story, as some perceive him as more similar to Obama in some ways than the others are. I think Romney will be the GOP candidate who gets the nomination. But even as he rises to the top of his group, people will see that there really are *not* that many similarities between him and Obama, and a stark contrast will develop. By then, it will probably be too late for the GOP, just like it was in 1996.Realistically, whether they like him or not, Romney probably presents the best opportunity for the GOP to win the 2012 presidential election. But as Free said in another thread, Romney has a spine of jelly... and Obama's is a bit sturdier than that.
"Runny jello" is actually how Free described it.
Because Obama screws up verbally about one tenth of one percent of the time. That must be exactly how often they turn off the teleprompter.@SnaveThe GOP is losing its chance to beat Obama in a similar way to how they lost their chance to beat Clinton in 1996.Lots of people don't like Obama, it's true. But once it gets to be crunch time and they more seriously consider the alternatives, greater numbers of voters will choose to vote for him. I bet you were saying the same thing in 1979 last time Republicans ran a hard core conservative during a recession...No presdient has survived unemployment like this since Harry Truman. The economy will bump for the holidays, and bump again in late April, then it will crash again in the Summer just in time for November elections.Good luck, hey if they offer up Romney you guys just might pull it off. I know I won't vote for him.If they nominate Romney like the establishment wants to, I will 100% agree with that statement.
Because Obama screws up verbally about one tenth of one percent of the time. Yeah, because Hawaii is in Asia you know! You'd think he'd know which continent his home state is on! What a moron! Then again, with all those 57 states Obama has to be president of, he must get confused.
When ever we point out Obama's screw ups they allways have some excuse. Since they can't defend Obama's failed Presidency, they have to destroy any one who might oppose him.
We're destroying the GOP candidates? Are we somehow making them act like idiots during their debates and interviews?
Cain's brain freeze was 11 seconds. Obama's brain freeze was 36 seconds. So that must mean that Obama is 3 times the idiot that Cain is.
The difference being that after Cain's pause was over he still couldn't provide any kind of real answer.
Yes, now it's Newt's turn.At this point, the GOP candidates are the ones doing the damage to themselves. If they were not so inept, there would be fewer negative stories about them in the news. 8-)Taking 36 seconds to come up the right answer versus 11 seconds to come up with a wrong answer? Sounds like Obama's brain was at least engaging, whereas Cain's was not.As for 1979, I believed the election of Reagan was a foregone conclusion, due his strong personality and his generally appealing nature in the face of tough times. I voted against him, but it didn't make much difference. He was a much different breed than any of the current group of GOPpers. None of them could even be capable of carrying Reagan's jockstrap. Are you saying that someone as inept as Perry or Cain will automatically win because Obama is the president residing over a recession and the recovery from one?
Cain did answer, you just didn't like it.
No, because it sounded like gibberish.
You mean gibberish like thishttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=of61E1FesPU&feature=related
Post a Comment