|
So, I thought that I would make a thread discussing the next President of the United States.
For anyone who is not yet convinced that he will get the Conservative nomination:
Point 1 - http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=46473 <--- the poll referenced here was done BEFORE Cain's victory in Florida.
Point 2 - http://www.gallup.com/poll/election.aspx <--- Herman Cain is the only candidate who has consistently held a high Positive Intensity score; in fact I don't think that anyone has beaten him yet since he announced. Also, he is still under 50% recognition and is already within 5 points of beating Obama; by far the only candidate with such an amazing ratio.
Point 3 - the other candidates are weak. Romney will never be president as he is too close to Bush; you can bet that the liberals are getting the astroturf ready to destroy him if he gets the nomination. Perry has some of the same problems; he could probably win, but people don't love him like they do Herman Cain. Paul is unelectable and not a conservative. Bachmann, well we already know. Huntsman, same as Paul, Santorum same as Bachmann, Gingrich is awesome but has too much history. Anyway, you get the picture; would love to hear what you guys think as well.
Bottom line, the man is incredibly intelligent, and has successfully turned around two major corporations. Best of all, at least for me, is that he has never been a politician. I know that this is a detractor to some people, and would love to address your specific concerns. The bottom line is that we already have too many politicians, and not enough people who can actually make hard decisions without worrying about reelection and stepping on the wrong toes.
Also, he is black. The only way that Obama can possibly win in 2012 (short of a miraculous economic recovery, which he seems to be doing everything to prevent, lol) is if he can capture the minority vote again. A Cain / Rubio ticket would absolutely blow this out of the water.
I have been following Herman for years and have been an avid listener of his radio program. If anyone has any questions about his positions, I should be able to answer them. If you want to debate liberal / conservative ideology, then I may or may not respond to you.
I will ask that you do not make dumb posts like "Cain sux b/c he duzznt sepport teh abortionz our teh homoshecks." You are right, and we like it that way. Actually, for these social issues, Cain defers to the States, and would never pass any Federal regulation that would interfere with this tenet of the Constitution.
Also, http://www.facebook.com/groups/52944254947/ - here is a Facebook group dedicated to breaking news and discussions. We try to keep it clear of irrelevant stuff and garden-variety anti-Obama jokes, hate and the like, so that people have more room to talk; please feel free to join in.
|
There's no way he's electable.
|
There's some kind of appeal to Cain's 9-9-9 proposal, but it doesn't really make sense upon any kind of scrutiny.
The current tax code sucks, but replacing it with 9% corporate income tax, 9% personal income tax, and 9% sales tax...really now. There was already some flat tax debate with Huckabee four years ago.
edit: okay, so any type of liberal is going to balk hard at this type of tax code. It's the opposite of a progressive tax code.
And then looking at how much (little) revenue this produces, conservatives would have a strong fear that those 9% numbers would creep upwards in practice.
|
On October 02 2011 06:50 Myrmidon wrote:
There's some kind of appeal to Cain's 9-9-9 proposal, but it doesn't really make sense upon any kind of scrutiny.
The current tax code sucks, but replacing it with 9% corporate income tax, 9% personal income tax, and 9% sales tax...really now. There was already some flat tax debate with Huckabee four years ago.
There's a lot to be said about flat taxes. Before I spend too much time educating, please look here for a full explanation and rebuttal of common arguments. Please pay particular attention to the prebates as they are discussed; this will in no way result in a regressive taxation system.
|
inb4 partisans have a shitstorm debate in this thread not realizing the two parties are almost practically the same shit and forget why they complain about every president being the same as the last one.
Unless Herman Cain turns out to be a nutjob crazy religious/"moral" fascist like the Colonels (see late 1960s Greek history), then I don't really care about him other than for the comedy from listening to political bs'ing every now and then.
No one seems intelligent or innovative enough to get the US out of its steady decline, and even if there was, the interests of big corporations and financial institutions come first.
|
Wow are you from the future? It's pretty strong language to say he will be the next president.
|
Your introduction is kind of misleading. I feel like you are saying without any doubt that Herman Cain has already won. I'm sorry but it is too early to tell. I feel like yes he has his chance, but he has a long way to go before he becomes the front runner. And the media isn't pushing him into the spot light like they have with Bachmann, then Rommey, and now Perry.
Only time will tell.
|
I think you have an over optimistic view of what Republican primary voters are looking for. Cain's a bigger force than the media gives him credit for. But he doesn't have the anger, he'll show the same weaknesses on his right flank that Perry, et. al. have shown.
Unelectibilty makes him unelectable. It appears to me that Republicans have too many litmus tests. Any of a number of issues makes you undesirable to a large number of Republican activists (see: Perry & immigration). Basically NO candidate can meet the demands of the modern Republican electorate. But they have to nominate someone. Enter the guy who pays lip service, is a little oily, but that's viewed as acceptable because he's more 'electable' (and known). And I'm not just talking about Romney here, McCain had the same aura. Previous run, not beloved, but acceptable as a chance at victory.
When no candidate can meet the standards of the electorate, the one who seems like they'll win carrying your standard - even though you know you don't like him - will win.
Herman Cain needs one of two things to be true to gain the nomination. Either he has to be farther to the right than virtually any other candidate in the race and never have been otherwise. Or I have to be wrong, and the Republican party is not so hung up on principles and standards that any deviation from (insert position here) is seen as near-treason.
|
On October 02 2011 06:45 Letho wrote:So, I thought that I would make a thread discussing the next President of the United States. For anyone who is not yet convinced that he will get the Conservative nomination: Point 1 - http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=46473 <--- the poll referenced here was done BEFORE Cain's victory in Florida. Point 2 - http://www.gallup.com/poll/election.aspx <--- Herman Cain is the only candidate who has consistently held a high Positive Intensity score; in fact I don't think that anyone has beaten him yet since he announced. Also, he is still under 50% recognition and is already within 5 points of beating Obama; by far the only candidate with such an amazing ratio. Point 3 - the other candidates are weak. Romney will never be president as he is too close to Bush; you can bet that the liberals are getting the astroturf ready to destroy him if he gets the nomination. Perry has some of the same problems; he could probably win, but people don't love him like they do Herman Cain. Paul is unelectable and not a conservative. Bachmann, well we already know. Huntsman, same as Paul, Santorum same as Bachmann, Gingrich is awesome but has too much history. Anyway, you get the picture; would love to hear what you guys think as well. Bottom line, the man is incredibly intelligent, and has successfully turned around two major corporations. Best of all, at least for me, is that he has never been a politician. I know that this is a detractor to some people, and would love to address your specific concerns. The bottom line is that we already have too many politicians, and not enough people who can actually make hard decisions without worrying about reelection and stepping on the wrong toes. Also, he is black. The only way that Obama can possibly win in 2012 (short of a miraculous economic recovery, which he seems to be doing everything to prevent, lol) is if he can capture the minority vote again. A Cain / Rubio ticket would absolutely blow this out of the water. I have been following Herman for years and have been an avid listener of his radio program. If anyone has any questions about his positions, I should be able to answer them. If you want to debate liberal / conservative ideology, then I may or may not respond to you. I will ask that you do not make dumb posts like "Cain sux b/c he duzznt sepport teh abortionz our teh homoshecks." You are right, and we like it that way. Actually, for these social issues, Cain defers to the States, and would never pass any Federal regulation that would interfere with this tenet of the Constitution. Also, http://www.facebook.com/groups/52944254947/here is a Facebook group dedicated to breaking news and discussions. We try to keep it clear of irrelevant stuff and garden-variety anti-Obama jokes, hate and the like, so that people have more room to talk; please feel free to join in.
Don't think he will the be nomination. Why are we discussing this? It's over a year away the election.
Also I find it funny you had to actually address that on your Facebook grp page that you don't allow Anti-Obama jokes/hate. Been having problems with that lately?
|
16934 Posts
There is no way this joke of a candidate is going to secure the Republican nomination.
|
He has never been a politician and that's a good thing?
That simply means that when elected he's going to have to get used to being president of the US and also with the complexities of the political system.
Politics is a trade, a give and take. I scratch your back you scratch mine. I give a vote for your plan, you give a vote for mine.
That's how politics works. I don't see how having no experience in the political system is a plus.
It seems to be similar to people wanting "a guy they can have a beer with" instead of "one o them Harvard elites".
On an ending note i find it rather peculiar that you would make an opening post discussing a candidate and proceed to place limits on where you feel the debate can and cannot go. If the guy supports anti-gay sentiments then people should be able to be critical on him for that.
Trying to keep a discussion from going off-topic is entirely different from saying that you don't want people to dicuss a candidate's position on certain issues.
|
At first I liked him, but I'm not so convinced now.
He's kind of the populist candidate, I don't like that.
|
A bit of a sidetrack but what exactly do you find "awesome" about Newt Gingrich?
|
While we're on the topic, does it seem to anyone else that Huntsman is running for vice president? He seems to be focused on keeping his name in the media and appearing more LIBERAL than any other presidential candidate. He was also known as a moderate in Utah. Just the sort of person that might be picked up by a conservative candidate looking to de-crazify the ticket after the primary.
Edit: Zooper, haha, you are so right on conservative groups having to specify the no offensive, pure-hate content.
|
On October 02 2011 06:55 Empyrean wrote:
There is no way this joke of a candidate is going to secure the Republican nomination.
Agreed. He needs way to much to get going. The media is going to push him down like they have every other candidate other than Perry/Romney
|
On October 02 2011 07:00 Kornkob wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2011 06:55 Empyrean wrote:
There is no way this joke of a candidate is going to secure the Republican nomination. Agreed. He needs way to much to get going. The media is going to push him down like they have every other candidate other than Perry/Romney
I would argue that is part of the problem with our system. The news stations essentially decide our nominees for us. They decide who gets more air time.
Either way, it is too early to tell. Bachmann had her surge and fall. Perry had his surge, and appears to be falling, even though it is still too early to tell. Romney isn't really going anywhere, and probably never will. Other candidates seem to be a vote 'against' Romney, if anything.
|
On October 02 2011 06:55 Empyrean wrote:
There is no way this joke of a candidate is going to secure the Republican nomination.
To be fair, they are all joke candidates.
|
On flat taxes: conservatives don't like tax hikes and they don't like cutting military or security funding. Or defaulting on debt service, or cutting most of the budget, really. (See: rise in gov't spending in every Republican administration for the past 50 years save Bush I.) Flat taxes sound great but even Republicans will never pass an actual flat tax proposal because it will either
a) be incredibly unpopular due to the tax hike for most Americans
or
b) require massive government spending cuts or a credit default followed by massive government spending cuts (and I'm not talking about cuts to the tiny discretionary non-military slice of the pie)
It's really really easy to cut the income tax: raise the corporate income tax or capitals gains tax or balloon the deficit. Guess which option has been the Republican preference for 40 years.
|
I hope you don't seriously believe that Cain could get the nomination over Romney.
Seriously, don't delude yourself, it's pointless.
|
Anyone who says he wouldnt allow muslims in his cabinet because one of em might be a terrorist doesnt have a good shot in a general election.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
