lolCainFollow

Sounds like a generic brand name for lidocaine.

Really, Swype? Autopredicting me in Spanish?

Edited, Nov 3rd 2011 10:31am by Debalic

I love how much of a hypocrite Varus is. It's awesome, really.

Well, hopefully people who largely align with a party do so because it meets most of their goals on the issues most important to them.


I pray the rest of you dopes feel the same way and vote this guy into the general election. That would be awesome.

What bothers me most about Cain's downfall is that Michelle Bachmann has possibly positioned herself to get sucked into the vacuum he leaves in his wake.

Fine with me, I'd love to see Mrs. $2 Gas be the nominee.

She makes Palin seem sound rational. Honestly, the republicans would be foolish if they nominate anyone but Romney. Perry might have had a shot, but since his only way to not look foolish in a debate is to not show up, I think his chances are weak.

Michelle's already been Flavor of the Month once. Unfortuantely, they're rapidly running out of Anyone-But-Romney options.

I think he looked at this train wreck and figured it would be better to wait until 2016. He's basically gambling on Romney not getting the nomination.

Cain is awesome

1) I'm going to build an electric fend

2) I was joking about the electric fence, jeez.. Although I'm not taking an electric fence off the table.

I don't think there has ever been a better moment in presidential campaigning history then when Cain went on mainstream television and said he supported the Palestinian right to return. It's like watching someone on a public bus sit in the seat with spit in it with none of the guilt for not telling him beforehand.

Well, sorta. People tend to identify their party affiliation because it contains more of the prefferential stances on 'the issues'.

This is the standard unless people are allowed to directly vote on the issues rather than on a placeholder for them.

The only non-Romney candidate I could see going into a general is Huntsman. For him to do so, however, every other non-Romney candidate would have to crash and burn.

It's clear that education has changed, because I remember very clearly learning in 11th grade US History that US political parties are only defined by the issues.

That wasn't my "liberal biased" teacher, that was the textbook. In Georgia.

Yeah cat, you're assuming he knew what a textbook was.

To be fair, Reagan was considered a California liberal hippie before he was elected as well. Back then the same/equivalent social issues folks didn't think he was conservative enough. This hasn't really changed. Funny story. I was at my sisters inlaws last Saturday. A couple of the more conservative family members were raving about Cain. I threw up my stock "not being a politician sounds great until it's time to get people to vote for him" bit. Someone mentioned how Romney wasn't really conservative enough for her, and said something like: "I can't see how he can be a good conservative having been the governor of a liberal state".

I laughed and sarcastically mentioned how poorly that worked out for conservatives the last time.


Not saying Romney is Reagan or anything, but the perception of Romney right now is very very similar to Reagan's back in the mid 70s. I suspect that most conservatives will get over it and move forward at some point.

Because 'we' don't have possession of the ban-hammer.

Could be. It's gonna be fun to watch varus try to stuff his "RINO" comments back into his mouth once Romney inevitably gets the go-ahead.

Does job=4 still have the most? Or forum=10?

And infinitely more electable than Cain!

- completely made up.