« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Herman Cain is Losing Me

Wherein He Loses the Pivotal Ben Howe Endorsement

I am a witness to defeat being snatched from the jaws of victory.

I’ve written on Rick Perry before and expressed that he is a candidate that I can support. I’d also previously expressed an interest in Sarah Palin, Chris Christie & Herman Cain. Sarah and Chris aren’t running obviously, and last night I got a deeper insight into who Herman Cain is. I find myself disappointed and concerned.

I’ll start with his 9,9,9 plan. On it’s face, there is a lot that I like about the 9,9,9 plan, besides its catchy name. I like that it lowers the personal and corporate income taxes to a low and flat level. I like that it eliminates other taxes like Capital Gains, Payroll & Self-Employment taxes. I like that it allows investments to be written off for business. There is a lot to like in this plan.

Unfortunately, what’s not to like trumps all of that.

I’m amazed that he’s only just now getting heat for opening the doorway to a brand new revenue stream for government to toy with. The national sales tax is an absolutely awful idea. I’ve never been much of a fan of the fair tax anyway, but at least they proposed simultaneously getting rid of the income tax as opposed to simply adding another way for government to bleed the populace.

If the 9,9,9 plan played out exactly as Mr. Cain is suggesting, it might be fine. But the fact that he thinks for even a moment that it has a shot shows an ignorance of Washington unparalleled on that stage.

There are only two ways that I see 9,9,9 getting passed. One would be some enterprising Democrats realizing that they’ll have brand new money to play with and enthusiastically jumping at the chance to create a new revenue stream. The second way is if Gandalf the Grey summoned his giant Eagle friends to threaten members of Congress to make a constitutional amendment that forces it to stay exactly as it is…forever.

While we’re on the subject, the payroll tax holiday is a bit of a non-starter as well.  He claims that he’s ridding employees of this burden while ignoring the fact that half of the burden is on the employer.  He may wrongly believe that employers will magnanimously forward all of the proceeds from these savings into an employees paycheck, but this would be further ignorance on his part.  More confounding ignorance actually, since he does have vast business experience and should know how a small business owner would look at the opportunity to amass more cash flow.

Believe me, I want the current tax code thrown out as much as anyone. I want to elect a Congress that will vote for a Flat Tax as well. But we can’t do that if we’re going to throw away all of our experience with government and ignore their penchant for taking a good idea and morphing into a monster.

There was another part of Cain that bothered me, which I hadn’t seen until last night. He’s still trying to find a way to defend his TARP support. Is TARP worth defending? I’ve consistently made the case that it is not. Cain’s defense stands on an indefensible premise: “I agreed with the concept but not the implementation.”

This defense revealed to me a personality trait about Herman Cain that I cannot defend. It is the same personality trait you find in any big government supporter: They will support things on paper that look good when they throw in their biased assumptions, and when its real world application fails, they blame the implementation ignoring the fact that human nature must be part of the equation.

It’s not dissimilar to the argument that Communism works if you get the right people to do it. Well, the problem is that people are going to be people, and if people can bring the whole thing tumbling down simply by being themselves, then you’re doomed from the outset.

TARP was a bad idea. We did not “save the free market by abandoning free market principles.” We simply abandoned free market principles. We allowed government to give unfair advantage over competitors who could have had a landslide of new clientele from the closure of such massive institutions as Bank of America. There could have been more mergers, more acquisitions, more opportunity, and new jobs, had the free market been allowed to function and eliminate the losers through market selection.

Anyone who supports TARP must stop fooling themselves into believing that the problem was the implementation. The problem was the idea.  And for all the heat that some get on that stage for “crony capitalism,” it’s hard to look past the support of giving almost $1 trillion dollars to the banking industry and say that it doesn’t encourage the same cronyism.

So Cain has lost me with this. Two extremely important tests for me he has failed. And in both cases it seems to be for the same reason: he has a misplaced almost childlike faith in the implementation by bureaucracy, to keep promises, implement flawlessly, and execute dutifully. Time and again, government has proven it is capable of no such thing.

While it’s certainly the case that I will support whoever the eventual nominee is, be it Cain, Romney or Perry, this does whittle down my more enthusiastic support for primary candidates.  I guess that means for now, I mostly support Perry.

This guy has two major issues in the primaries:

  1. In state tuition for illegal aliens
  2. EO for mandatory vaccinations
I am not going to go into them again, only to say, if you balance those against his stance against TARP, the enormous job creation in his state, his willingness to boldly confront entitlements using language we’ve all been using for years that approaches it honestly, his strong pro-life, pro state’s rights, pro-military, anti-big government, spending cutting, education reforming record and rhetoric, he should be a shoe in.
Thus, my opening sentence about the jaws of victory.  He, or perhaps the people around him, can’t seem to get their heads out of their asses and into the game.  A few days ago, I watched this video of him on Glenn Beck back in June and few things occurred to me.

 

 

Governor Perry, I’m taking a wild guess here, but after watching the above video, I’d say that something has changed behind the scenes.  In that video, you were able to express your thoughts and articulate your ideas, perhaps not with the flair of pretty-boy Romney or with the dash of Barack Obama.  But certainly without the appearance of being unprepared, which is how you look in the current debates.

When it comes to oration Governor Perry, you are no Barack Obama.  You are no Ronald Reagan.  Sometimes I wonder if you’re even a George W. Bush.  And while it’s true that your leadership and ideas are more important than your debate skills, Erick Erickson was right this morning when he said that it didn’t matter.  If it’s important to the primary voters to see that you can articulate your positions, then it should be important to your campaign.

Stop prepping for zingers.  It seems so obvious that the time you’re spending is mostly prepping talking points.  ”Zing Romney with this one, deflect this question with this one,” etc etc.  I’ve had the pleasure of meeting and listening to you in person.  You know your stuff.  You knows why you’ve done what you’ve done.  You knows what needs to happen if elected president.  Your advisors need to take you above the fray.  When they pit you against Romney, ignore the bait and go after Obama and his record and use your record to make your case.

This should’ve been easy.  Stop making it hard.

Follow @Ben_Howe

COMMENTS

  • bk

    Obama calls that a tax “cut” that he implemented, but it’s kind of like how my credit union sometimes lets you “skip” a car payment in December. Maybe it temporarily helps you with cash flow, but it doesn’t change how much money you owe them. Worst case it stays the same, but perhaps it even bumps it up a hair.

    The only “good” thing about it is that it’s not as bad as the only other thing that Democrats support as a “tax cut” – increasing EITC and handing out more welfare to people who aren’t paying taxes, calling it a tax cut instead of increased welfare.

    Like you said, opening the door to a new revenue stream is a disaster. Personal income taxes started at a modest 1% nearly a century ago, correct?

    • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

      Cain would have won by saying nothing given the recent polls, esp nationally and in SC and especially given that so many other candidates felt the need to attack his 9-9-9 plan so many times. But Cain scored a slam dunk by defending his plan so well especially from the attacks that it is not a ?jobs plan? and on the issue of a new stream for the feds to tax. His proposal includes a 2/3 requirement to ever increase the rates. that satisfies the fear that his plan would grow like the current system we live under that already allows for many streams of taxes to the feds. And obviously such low rates and simplification would unleash job creation. This is fundamental.

      Romney also ?won? me over a bit with his promise to cap federal spending at a lower % of GDP and seek a balanced budget amendment. I still want details on how he will cut the federal govt spending.

      Perry was better in the second half was was still a bit too low key.

      Bachmann seems to have returned to her good character and did well as well. May be a VP possibility.

      • Ben Howe

        Since the only way we can have a 2/3 requirement in the first place is if we get a 2/3 vote to amend the constitution to require it.

        So if it’s so easy to get a 2/3 vote in order to amend the constitution, why would it be any kind of barrier to change in the future?

        If it’s easy once, it’s easy again, no?

        • ahedlund84

          I, too, share some concerns with Cain’s tax plan. How much revenue will it raise? What will its distributional impact be? However, I am not worried about Democrats taking 9-9-9 to 19-19-19 anytime in the near future. Why? Because raising the sales tax means raising *everybody’s* taxes. As it stands, Democrats are too cowardly to advocate for tax increases on any significant chunk of Americans (thankfully), so they resort to raising taxes only on “the rich.” It’s the only way they can have a chance at winning politically. I can’t see them advocating for a broad-based sales tax increase.

          The only caveat to what I just said, however, is if the Democrats can successfully paint the issue as one between raising the sales tax and cutting off somebody’s healthcare/education/etc. People *might* be willing to support a sales tax increase if they thought it was the only way for them not to lose their healthcare. This is precisely why repealing (and replacing) Obamacare is of critical importance.

          As long as we stave off the Orwellian future where people see the government as the main provider of their healthcare, then I am fairly confident in my prediction that Democrats would be risking political suicide by advocating for a sales tax increase.

      • Common_Cents

        However, he has much work to do on the 999 plan.

        specifically, people are resistant to change, no matter how their current situation sucks. Cain must explain the 999 plan by income category. He must answer the question by how his plan affects ME. (ME being everyone in various categories)

      • lookingforward

        All this debate about the 9-9-9 plan is as pointless as debating government unicorns. This plan, as with any flat tax (which I would support) means removing Congress’ ability to manipulate the market via the tax code. This is the single biggest power that Congress holds, and it is one that both the left and right have used for over 100 years. Replacing our current system with a flat tax of any kind would bring strong opposition from #1: The energy sector (both oil/gas and “green” energy) #2: The healthcare industry #3: All forms of higher education #4: All charities (both religious institutions and secular charities) #5: A host of smaller interests who enjoy particularly selective tax breaks. In the face of this opposition, it is laughable to think that one can get 2/3 of Congress to agree to a plan. It would be nearly impossible to get 2/3 of Congress to agree on something as simple as lunch, much less a complete overhaul of our tax system that would greatly gut their power and tie their hands down the road. If we are to take Herman Cain seriously, he needs to give us an economic plan that has a reasonable chance of passing Congress.

        • lineholder

          There is absolutely nothing wrong with presenting ideas that might be a means of reforming our current tax system. What’s more, if Conservatives had a lick of sense, we’d already be presenting ideas to take on entitlement reform as well.

          The systems that currently exist have been in existence for many years, just as you have said. Times change, and our systems haven’t kept up with those changes, other to become excessively large, wasteful and bloated to the hilt as a means of keeping people as government employees.

          Yes, there is likely to be plenty of resistance to this type of change, and we’ll just have to take on that battle when it comes, won’t we?

          If you have ideas of your own about how we could approaching reform, please by all means present them and we can all discuss them.

        • Death_of_the_Donkey

          in a campaign. He will get to come to Ohio and talk about how Cain is going to raise your sales tax to 15+%, all the while cutting rates for corps and billionaires. The merits of the plan (which in the long run probably are pretty decent, but the short run may be killer) are almost meaningless when selling a public on a aggregate sales tax rate of 15%+ is impossible. This would be a gift to the Obama campaign.

        • http://www.sunshinestatesarah.com SunshineStateSarah

          Here’s the link on Cain’s website explaining it…note charitable deductions are still included:

          http://www.hermancain.com/999plan

          • http://conservativemountaineer.blogspot.com/ conservativemountaineer

            Mortgage deductions will be included.. then, State and local taxes.. then Medical.. then..

            Oh.. and then.. special tax credits against both the Sales Tax and the Income Tax for the “poor’. Think EITC on steriods.

            Well, you get the picture. I hope.

            This 9-9-9 Plan is a non-starter for me.

            Full Disclosure – Yes, I am a CPA. However, I do not prepare income tax returns except mine. I’m a CFO. I have no dog in the simplify income taxes debate. I’m also not in favor of the flat tax for the same reasons as the 9% income tax proposal.

      • carolynr

        Perry brought up Balanced budget…Not Romney. Cain cannot win with 9/9/9 it’s another opportunity for Congress TO STEAL YOUR MONEY

  • http://www.neoavatara.com/blog neoavatara

    Perry so far has provided no plan for anything.

    Until he clearly puts out ideas, I cannot support him. Pointing to Texas is not a plan for the nation. He needs to do better.

    • cajungirl2012

      but most folks don’t read them. People do listen, so I hope he gets them out there in normal speak (unlike Romney-Gore speak).

    • streiff

      post on that topic

      If you aren’t interested in the subject of Herman Cain, fine. Don’t post or start your own diary.

      Questions?

      • APA Guy

        nt

      • APA Guy

        nt

      • Jim Tomasik

        .,.

        • Bill S

          There are approximately 20 paragraphs in this diary. Exactly 3 (the last 3) discuss Perry.

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    There won’t be a Palin. There won’t be a Christie. There won’t be a Giuliani.

    We’ve got to dance with the girls that brung us.

    • lineholder

      I know that within the political realm, vetting of candidates is taken seriously, and rightfully so. I’ve got my share of questions about Cain’s 999 plan, just like I’m sure I’ll have my share of questions about the economic plan Perry is preparing to release.

      I want Conservatism to win. In regards to policy, our nation has moved quite a bit to the left during Obama’s term and we still have a year+ to go. We need a strong move back to the right to counter this. Tackling reform of both our current tax and entitlement systems is something we will have to begin to do if we want to see a move back to the right, i.e. limited government, reduction of spending, etc.

      Even though I have questions about Cain’s plan, in the context of reform, I do see it as an effort to move in the right direction. It isn’t ideal, but for all we know, it could be used as a springboard to better ideas or better solutions.

      Is it always going to be like for Conservatives, where we talk about reform but when someone presents an effort to at least take on the issue of reform, we shoot it down unequivocally? Because if it is, we’ll never get anything done.

      • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

        And makes us all fools for his “inevitability.”

        • lineholder

          But it isn’t over yet, usadebateboard. It’s still possible that this situation could unfold in such a way that Romney ends up having to shift to the right to win the nomination. I don’t know that it will matter much post election, because he does seem to have a tendency to experiences moments of epiphany when his viewpoint totally changes, and it does seem to have occurred for Romney more than it has for most people.

          It’s touch and go right now. Which I guess brings me back to your original comment…I’m not willing to rule out a candidate that’s more conservative than Romney. Not just yet.

          • macbookben

            …to give him a conservative legislature. Epiphany that, Romney!

          • lineholder

            ,

  • fredforamerica

    1) Assure conservatives that when a national sales tax is implemented, it cannot be hijacked by liberals in Congress and raised to harmful levels. Pledging support for a Constitutional Amendment to balance the budget and requiring a supermajority for tax increases before the 9-9-9 plan goes into effect would provide this assurance. In the time it takes to debate out a constitutional amendment and implement 9-9-9, Cain could lead Congress to get rid of the capital gains tax, repeal ObamaCare, and provide other tax incentives to boost the economy.

    2) Articulate that the long-term goal of Cain?s economic policy is an eventual transition to the FairTax system of taxation at the federal level. This is the end result of Cain?s plan. 9-9-9 is simply a bridge on the road to getting there.

    You can see the details of Cain?s plan at:
    http://www.hermancain.com/999plan

    For the record, I will gladly support either Cain or Perry as our eventual nominee. Cain is the one offering substantive plans at this point, however, not Perry. I’m waiting to see what Perry offers to help get the country off life support.

    • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

      Cain: “We’re both going to implement a national sales tax. He won’t tell you. I just did.”

    • lookingforward

      “In the time it takes to debate out a constitutional amendment and implement 9-9-9, Cain could lead Congress to get rid of the capital gains tax, repeal ObamaCare, and provide other tax incentives to boost the economy.”

      Have you met our Congress? Unless Cain has a magic pipe that makes them do whatever he says, you are kidding yourself if you think this is doable.

      • red_oakster

        nt

      • floridaveteran

        The current Congress will not be the Congress when Cain is elected President. Congress can be lead if the President is a leader and if the President is supported by the people.

        Take a look at what President Reagan accomplished!

        What will be the composition of the 113th Congress?

        • lookingforward

          Reagan accomplished a lot, but was also forced to take some awful deals. He traded amnesty for border security that never happened, he traded tax increases for budget cuts that never happened, and he failed to lead the Senate to confirm Robert Bork and instead stuck us with Anthony Kennedy (in whose hands Obamacare rests). Reagan could not have lead Congress to give up their enormous ability to manipulate the market via the tax code, and neither will Herman Cain.

    • bk

      I’d argue that 1) is impossible and that even if it were to happen, it would take many years to get a constitutional amendment passed.

      And 2) is smoke and mirrors – he can say what his long-term hopes, dreams, and goals are, but all that matters is what gets enacted into law. If we end up with two tax systems instead of one, you can bet that neither will ever go away.

      So as long as you’re going to shoot for the moon, you might as well say that on inauguration day you’re going to propose Amendment XXVIII that repeals Amendment XVI and gives Uncle Sam the power to implement a consumption tax in place of an income tax. Oh yeah, and you should add what you’re going to do with the current tax system for the four years of your term while you’re hoping that happens.

  • clintonformccain

    Having a “plan” is not the same as governing. I want to see a track record.

  • jrhode2873

    I think your criticism on Cain’s support of TARP is spot on. However, your criticism and just about every other criticism (including Erick’s) of Cain’s plan is fixated on the introduction of the sales tax without looking at the plan as a whole. For example, you list all the sources of revenue that are eliminated in Cain’s plan such as the payroll tax and capital gains taxes, etc and then proceed to harp on the sales tax without mentioning the fact that the overall effect of Cain’s plan is that it further constricts Congress’s ability to raise taxes and manipulate the tax code. Sure, he’s introducing a sales tax but he’s also getting rid of lot of things as well that Congress currently uses to raise taxes. I just don’t buy the argument that 999 will give Congress more ability than they have now to raise taxes.

    • Ben Howe

      is a point of much debate. He makes it seem as though he will ensure that these problems won’t happen by requiring a 2/3 vote to change things.

      But only the Congress is in a position to limit the Congress. If he wants it to require a 2/3 vote he’ll need to ammend the constitution which itself requires a 2/3 vote.

      So his assumption is that it’s easy to get the 2/3 vote to ammend but not to change it later?

      It’s inconsistent.

      • jrhode2873

        Your point about the 2/3 vote is a good one. Hard to defend Cain on that one. However, my overall point about his plan is that if you look at it as a whole, Congress will actually have less ways to manipulate the tax code and raise taxes than they do now. For example, under Cain’s plan you won’t have these temporary payroll tax holidays and you won’t have the concept of the “extention of the Bush tax cuts”. From what I know about 999, it seems to me to simplify things and actually take away some of Congress’s ability to do some of the things they do now. And, it will require more transparency on Congress’s part to raise taxes.

      • uncmike

        “But only the Congress is in a position to limit the Congress. If he wants it to require a 2/3 vote he?ll need to ammend the constitution which itself requires a 2/3 vote.”

        You really need to change the Constitution to eliminate the 16th amendment which authorized a federal income tax before letting Congress monkey around with new tax streams that will absolute bleed us dry. Cain has to reflect political reality when he offers a plan like 9-9-9. I say, nein, nein, nein to his plan as it does not reflect facts on the ground as of today. I think he has some good business experience, but that’s not the same as knowing how to go about changing the monster inside the Beltway.

      • http://nerds4cain.com Brookhaven

        That the sales tax portion of the plan won’t go into effect until a constitutional amemendment (1) prohibiting a VAT, and (2) requiring a 2/3 majority to raise taxes is passed.

        If it never passes, then Cain’s plan would be implemented as a straight forward flat tax. Something conservative of almost every stripe could get behind.

    • clintonformccain

      “Sure, he?s introducing a sales tax but he?s also getting rid of lot of things as well that Congress currently uses to raise taxes.”

      ———-

      Walk me through exactly how he is going to “get rid” of anything? Give me a plausible scenario by which Herman Cain gets a complete abolishment of the current tax system accomplished? Walk me through how he gets 60 votes in the US Senate without scratching any backs?

      These “plans” are all la-la-land.

      • jrhode2873

        The discussion about the effects of 999 and the ability to get it passed are two entirely different discussions. If Cain were to win the presidency, he would probably do so with a mandate and some form of his plan would probably pass Congress as a result.

  • Common_Cents

    The idea of Cain was awesome, much of a blank slate if you will. The conservative Obama. I’m not saying Cain doesn’t have substance and wouldn’t be a good CIC, as I think he would. I am addressing the fact that people jump on bandwagons early, in Cain’s case, before he got much scrutiny. The idea of the candidate is always better than the reality ;) Perry suffered the same, coming in with high expectations in his case, and disappointing in his early outings.

    This saying comes to mind, the best used car is your own, you already know what’s wrong with it.

    I think Cain will still resonate with new voters as he builds recognition but the guy isn’t vetted or tested as of yet. I keep a hopeful eye on him but won’t join the Cain Train just yet.

    • badspotteddog

      999 is a prelude to Fair Tax!
      http://www.hermancain.com/999plan

      Cain is the one candidate that seems to be able to influence people the most.
      His speaking ability, and common sense approach is unstoppable

      • lookingforward

        So after Cain magically leads Congress to give up their enormous power to manipulate the market through the tax code, he will then magically get 2/3 of them to repeal the 16th amendment and end the income tax? Right.

  • watchandlearn

    The argument toward Cain’s plan is that the national sales tax that is created will be corrupted by Washington. Ok…

    1. He eliminates the current tax code that has multiple revenue streams already in place. Any of those revenue streams can be increased at any time. No other candidate suggests getting rid of these revenue streams. Hint: These revenue streams can be increased/decreased at any time.

    2. Having a flat tax means that you’ll have to raise the tax rate of EVERYONE if you intend to raise it. That means the Democrats couldn’t play class warfare by saying, “We’ll only raise it on the rich.” They’ll have to argue raising it on the lower income families as well. It’s political suicide.

    3. It gets the ball rolling in the right direction. Perfect it is not, but it’s better than everyone else’s plans of “Deregulate/Cut taxes” because none of that is as far reaching or permanent.

  • TSquared

    If Romney, Perry (I’ll explain why he’s out in a moment), and Cain are out, then who’s left? Santorum, Paul, and Huntsman are non factors. Bachmann is becoming a non factor – justifiably or not. So that leaves Newt?

    Why is Perry out – at least for the moment? Because he’s a mumbler, stumbler, and a bumbler. Once you check off the box for conservative enough (everybody’s threshold is different), the next most important criteria – in my opinion – is the individuals ability to communicate. The candidate must be able to deal effectively with debates. It’s not going to get any better when you get in the arena with Obama. He/she must be able to reject the false premises of loaded questions from the left and the media (for an example, see Christie) – in debates, press conferences, etc. The candidate must be able to defend his policies and conservatism in general through the elections cycle and once in office (for a negative example see Bush 41 and Bush 43). I think we all want an effective champion to represent us and conservatism. We don’t want a stumbler and bumbler or a President who can’t or won’t defend himself/herself, his/her policies, conservatism, and – by extension – us (for examples of refusing to defend due to the “It’s beneath the office” excuse, again see Bush 41 and Bush 43). If Perry can’t show that he can step up to the plate in this respect, then I’ll have a hard time supporting him.

    That leave’s me back to the beginning. If I can’t support Perry, then who’s left. You suggest Cain is out. Most of the others are not viable. Who’s left?

    Depressing….

    • cajungirl2012

      Nothing is over until its over. Don’t be influenced by the media.

    • evilleramsfan

      I haven’t seen anybody able to work a room or a group like him. No, he doesn’t handle the debate format well, but as far as interviews go and talking to groups, he communicates the message well. Given a chance to announce his plan and a chance to speak on it, he will climb back up into contention.

    • carolynr

      For someone that you call a mumbler stumbler and bumbler…he’s done pretty good in his state. Facts are facts. Obama is articulate…so is Romney…but what have they done. Obama is a Marxist/Socialist…bordering on communist and Romney is Left of Center..and continues to (well…let’s be kind) misspeak when asked questions.

      So…how’s about we look at proof instead of window dressing?

      • http://conservativemountaineer.blogspot.com/ conservativemountaineer

        n/t

  • badspotteddog

    Awesome!
    http://www.hermancain.com/999plan

    Cain is the most convincing and realistic candidate.
    He would manage to get this passed.

    • Scope

      That’s always worked out so well with Congress and every presidency hasn’t it? Your willingness to believe that Cain has this magic wand that he can wave, and get exactly what he wants is very naive. It’s as naive as Cain believing that he can do whatever he wants, and he will always get his way.

      This is the problem with electing someone who has only ever had private sector experience. When Cain took over whatever companies he did, he made his plans, and then had them implemented to his desires. He didn’t have to work with another faction fighting him all the way. Cain may be inspiring, but I seriously doubt he will ever inspire any Democrat.

      I didn’t see the debate, but I’ve read some accounts of him getting a little agitated when being questioned about his 999 plan. If someone balks at something that he wants, as president, will he become petulent and angry because he doesn’t always get his way. Isn’t that what Obama does?

    • Xasteius

      ‘hope and change’(Obama), or ‘openess and transparency’ (Palin). And look what’s happened to both of them.

  • NeoKong

    I like Perry too to a degree but being a snoozer on TV is problematic because that is how most people will see him.
    He can beat Obama in Texas but doing it nationally might be a high hurdle to overcome.
    He may do well in off camera settings or one on one with a supportive interviewer but if he can’t hold his own on the big boy stage it doesn’t matter how good he is.

    Electability is what matters.
    Will Perry be able to go toe to toe against Obama on a national stage with 60 million people watching…?
    Think of the Kennedy/Nixon debate.
    If he starts stuttering again it’s all over.
    If he can’t make it to the White House then why bother….?

    • Ben Howe

      n/t

      • Scope

        Does it mean that if you don’t agree with a particular candidate you must never write again?

      • NeoKong

        Not unless Perry gets a whole lot better a whole lot faster.
        When people are saying things like ” Well….he didn’t do so bad. Hopefully the next debate he will be more prepared” does not inspire confidence.
        We can agree and disagree on the specifics of 999 or this and that.
        Incidentally Congress can raise any tax at any time. That is nothing new. They do so at their own peril.

        We need to be thinking post nomination. As much as a fine man the Governor is he is a gaffe prone, slow speaking southerner and Obama’s media palace guards will have him looking like the sheriff from the Dukes of Hazzard by this time next year.
        They are going easy on him now.

        Remember how the media loved Mr. Reach Across The Aisle….?
        They loved him until he knocked everyone else out and then they set upon him.
        He was too old. He had cancer. Could he complete his term ? He was old Washington and out of touch bluh blah blah.

        They will rip Perry to shreds. They will Palinize him.
        Think ahead to the GOP nomination.
        Who do you want to see on that stage ?

        Some good old boy who is a nice and everything but not the greatest orator or some fire brand preacher who can make a crowd stand on it’s feet…?
        I’m sorry but as irrelevant as that may sound it matters.
        Image matters.
        Obama took us to school on that lesson.

        They are both good guys who are easily better than Obama but one is more appealing to a larger demographic.

        • Aaron Gardner

          If you can’t, then I don’t see why I should care.

          • lineholder

            I do think that when the political environment is strongly anti-government/anti-politician, like the one we are currently facing, the image presented by a politician running in that kind of environment does matter to everyday ordinary voters. They are likely to look for something that says he’s not a typical, status-quo politician, more of the same old same old that got us to where we are today.

            Perry alone has it within his means to settle that issue. No one else. He’s the one who has to be able to combat against this particular type of environment .

          • Aaron Gardner

            That combat occurs on the trail, in stump speeches, in town hall Q&A’s. These are all areas in which Gov. Perry excels.

            I am of the opinion that these debates aren’t worth all that much in the long run and they certainly aren’t worth as much as retail politics.

            YMMV

          • lineholder

            I’d love to see it happen because it raises the bar and puts the emphasis on contrasting Conservatism to Liberalism. It wouldn’t bother me one bit to see the candidates shoot for the moon on this one, Aaron.

            If you look at political awareness on a scale of one to ten, with ten being the most avid of political junkies, I’d say you probably are closer to the high end than I am. And please don’t misinterpret what I’m saying, because I don’t see anything wrong with that.

            But because I’m closer to the end of the non-political average citizen, I’m just trying to present some ideas of what they are looking at and why, and how the kind of environment that currently exists is influencing their perception of candidates. Fair enough?

          • wonkish1

            In a country of 320 million people. Let me ask you do you think he’ll shake hands with.00001% of the population or .00002% of the population?

            I mean just being realistic here. I think being good at retail politics is a nice asset, but come on its not like it can really have much of an impact in a country this size.

          • Aaron Gardner

            That’s what grassroots is all about.

          • wonkish1

            that shook hands with Perry.

            I mean your kind of digging yourself in a hole here.

            Look I was rooting for Perry to enter the race over a year ago(mainly because my fav. Sanford screwed everything up), but he’s a little rusty when he’s unscripted. So was Cain when he first entered the scene. Doesn’t mean that a person can’t improve and Perry did last night. If he improves some more for the next one great. If he improves some more after that then the issue will cease to worry a lot of people.

            That’s pretty much it. Trust me if Perry does a good job and delivers than GOP primary voters will show up for them. I have faith in fellow GOP primary voters.

          • Aaron Gardner

            Why do candidates work so hard for NH and Iowa if all they really need to do is go on t.v. flash a plastic smile, throw out a flashy plan and avoid talking about their actual record, or lack thereof?

            Why do campaigns even have organizations?

            Obama had volunteers all over the nation working for him. McCain had a terrible organization that lacked discipline at all levels.

            Obama won. It wasn’t just because he was on t.v.

          • wonkish1

            Of course retail politics matters a lot in the primaries. And that is why its a good thing the early states are a smaller to allow for that.

            But in terms of general retail politics falls off a cliff.

          • Aaron Gardner

            Of course I am talking about the primaries.

            I’d bet that the strategy changes quite a bit in the general. Also, the structure that gets created during the primaries does do quite a bit to influence the vote in the general.

            I don’t think Perry will have a problem going after Obama in a 1 on 1 setting. It isn’t as if he will have to contend for time with 7 other candidates as he does now.

          • wonkish1

            Thinking about the general and they’re thinking about 4 years of government and so they are not counting on a candidates retail politics. They actually care about the debates because they want to know that they have a candidate that can handle themselves in unscripted events in front of the nation.

            So again, retail politics is not a substitution for communication in front of the American people. There is just to many people in the country to go and meet all of.

          • Common_Cents

            Certainly, image is not consistent with being a conservative. You never get a second chance at a first impression. Debates are generally the first impression new voters get who don’t live in TX.

            If debates are only image, Perry shouldn’t even be in them. Since he is in them, he must see some value.

            Can Perry do his ground game nationwide in the same way he may have in TX? A lot more geography and people to cover I’d say.

            Conservatism is a product, image is part of marketing that product. They are different but important.

          • Aaron Gardner

            Look up some of the videos of his town hall appearances in NH. He has large crowds and gives effective answers. He takes the time to connect with the voters individually. I’d take that bit of marketing skill, combined with a real conservative record, over Romney’s slick debating skills which consist primarily of never answering a question or lying outright when answering a question.

            As for Cain, he barely has an organization on the ground at all and is going on a book tour in the middle of his campaign. I don’t see him retaining the initial buzz he has been able to create by being under the radar.

            The rest of the candidates truly don’t matter, so I won’t bother discussing them.

          • Scope

            He has been doing many many stops in many areas in Iowa leading up to the NH debate, and he is going back to Iowa to do many more town halls. Someone here had pointed out that the news stories in the local Iowa newspapers has been very positive for Perry. He is meeting as many people as he can. He is answering everyone’s questions with details and patience. He will win over voters one person at a time despite the MSM trash jobs on him.

            We cannot allow the MSM and the Republican elites to destroy the most experienced candidate with a very successful record. We cannot allow the MSM to give us another McCain.

          • NeoKong

            He has to do it on national TV.
            Those TV debates are very important.
            I have heard him speak in person too.
            He’s a helluva’ guy.
            It’s not enough but I’ll tell you what.
            This will get down to a three man race soon enough.

            We’ll see how he does.

          • Aaron Gardner

            I am saying that the debates aren’t the only avenue to get on national t.v. Also, local t.v outlets cover local events, and there are still a lot of people who watch their local news. Not everyone is a Fox Junkie waiting around to be told who they should vote for. In fact, I would say that most likely primary voters aren’t that type at all.

          • NeoKong

            Not everyone is a Fox Junkie waiting around to be told who they should vote for.

          • Aaron Gardner

            Seems pretty self explanatory to me.

          • rightwingmom52

            who have limited resources and/or access to the information folks like us have. I know this is anecdotal to some extent, but please allow me to explain.

            My parents (in their 80′s) live in a rural area of Tennessee. Only in the last 5 or so have they had access to cable or satellite, and they don’t have a computer. (During the 2000 recount, I called my mother every day during carpool to give her updates from reliable sources other than the 3 major networks which was all they had at the time.) This is true for the majority of folks that live in the same area. They read their local newspapers, but by and large, the only semblance of a right leaning news source is Fox. Of course, they’re lucky that they have me and other family members to advise them to take what they hear with a grain of salt, and quite often, to let flesh out what they’ve heard with the truth and/or more details. It’s not that their ignorant or aren’t conservative or don’t care, or that they’re waiting for Fox to tell them who to vote for (that’s my job), but they are not political junkies, and their resources are quite limited. What about those folks who don’t have someone like me to feed them the truth or details about what is being reported through those limited resources? In my opinion, the debates are most likely the only glimpses into a candidate that many rural folks are going to see.

            I said in another comment that just because I support Cain (today) doesn’t mean I’m against Perry. I sincerely hope and pray that each candidate is so exceptional at conveying the conservative message that we win in a landslide. But because of those folks who don’t have access to the video you’ve posted, or aren’t likely to have an opportunity to attend a townhall, or can’t look up the other side to a story on a computer, it is imperative that our candidates make the most of their opportunities in the debates. Romney’s done a better job of that than Perry. The upcoming debate should have much more of an impact than last night’s because of the expanded viewership, although I’ll have to unblock the channel on my TV.

          • Aaron Gardner

            Because those are the people I am saying will benefit more from the retail side than the debates.

            I’d wager that people who don’t attend townhalls and don’t see anything beyond Fox or the big three, are much less likely to be primary voters. That said, you actually lend credence to my point about retail politics have a greater affect by noting that your parents, and people like them, rely on their family members who are more tuned in when making their choices on candidates.

            If your parents are general election voters, which I am assuming is the case, they will see a different style in the general election debates when it is 1 on 1 rather than 1 on 7.

            What people don’t seem to be getting is that I am talking about primary debates and primary politics.

            The game changes once there is a nominee.

          • rightwingmom52

            early voters in fact, as are other family members who I put in the same category, i.e., the limited access segment. They vote in every local, state, and federal election, including primaries – few exceptions. They are very much aware of the importance of electing conservatives in the primary and are paying attention as best they can.

          • Aaron Gardner

            That is my point. They have a fundamental mistrust of the media and rely on those they know are better informed to help come to a conclusion.

            This is part of retail politics. You as an individual have a greater affect on their eventual vote than any debate performance because they trust you.

          • rightwingmom52

            was what about those folks like my parents, mostly the elderly in rural areas, who don’t have someone like me to nudge or flat out push them in the right direction? What about those who distrust the media, even Fox, but have nowhere else to turn? There are still a lot of folks living in very rural areas throughout our country, and as technologically advanced as we are, not everyone has the same toys as we do. Among this segment, I would assume there are those who watch the primary debates and care enough to vote in the primary, and it seems to me that the debates would be among their primary (no pun intended) influences.

            Maybe I’m not just not expressing my question/point clearly enough. Sometimes that happens. The good news is that I do try to influence everyone I can!

            BTW, hope you and yours are all settled back in and suffering no further trauma from the hurricane.

          • Common_Cents

            But how much ground can you cover with enough critical mass not to spread yourself thin. There is only one candidate and several key states that need extensive ground game.

          • NeoKong

            How does John McCain like Arizona….?

            How does being naive get us to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. ?
            You cannot ignore the reality of how the game is played today.

            Do you want to win or do you want to be the best text book conservative?

          • Aaron Gardner

            McCain was neither a conservative nor was he able to produce an image of viability.

          • NeoKong

            That’s my point.
            His campaign sucked and we kept telling ourselves “Don’t worry…he still has two more debates to pull it out”.

            On paper Cain was still better than Obama but he got destroyed.
            Campaigns matter.

          • TSquared

            How is requiring effective communication skills inconsistent with with conservatism?

          • Aaron Gardner

            I also think I am being charitable in calling the current gaggles of republicans being given 30 responses to idiotic questions debates.

            Perry seems to be an effective communicator on the trail. You win votes on the trail.

            These debates have been little but bread and circus for the watchers.

          • TSquared

            No matter the stage or audience (debate or otherwise) you need to be effective with that mouth.

            I’m not sure I agree that one can afford to surrender certain battlefields – or any battlefield – and rely on others to win this type of war. I certainly don’t see as plausible that one can win it on the trail alone – especially when what is done on the trail is most often out of view of the public at large.

            I agree that in many respects – these debates are of little value. ‘Please sir, how would you SPECIFICALLY fix the economy, jobs, and entitlements? And please confine your response to 30 seconds’. However, these debates should not be discounted. Taken as a whole than can reveal many things about a candidate. Perry, being a good example. I had no idea that he was such a thick tunged, stumble-bumble – much like Bush 43 – until I saw it first hand watching these debates. I was excited when Perry entered the race. After 4 debates, little excitement remains.

          • Aaron Gardner

            Watch both part I and part II. Then come back here and honestly tell me he lacks effective communication skills.

            In both his stump and the Q&A that followed he handled himself very well. He connected with those voters. He excels at retail politics. He has an organization on the ground and it is getting stronger with each passing day.

            I think when the field winnows, and the debates have less candidates he will do much better, but with 8 candidates on the stage people like Romney are given ample cover to lie through their teeth and never get called on it due to the basic structure of the debate.

            I am not going to discount a candidate who raised $17 million in half a quarter and who excels at retail politics just because he hasn’t performed in debates that most people won’t even remember after January of 2012.

            YMMV

          • TSquared

            But who saw it? Probably not many. Certainly not a national audience like what will be tuning in when our nominee goes head to head with Obama on a debate stage.

            The only reason that I knew that Perry gave a stump speech and did a Q&A at a local frat after the debate is because it was noted on a Blog that I frequent.

            Delivering a stump speech well is one thing. Thinking (and communicating effectively) on your feet – under pressure – is another.

            Don’t get me wrong – I thought Perry delivered a good speech for his announcement/kickoff (which is why I had some initial excitement about him entering the race). But being able to deliver a good speech is not enough. We already got a guy in the WH that’s known for that.

            Note: I can’t watch the posted videos. At work. Blocked.

          • Aaron Gardner

            So come back once you’ve done that and pitch it to me again.

          • TSquared

            I’m still not impressed. In fact your video bolsters my argument – in my opinion.

            Check out Perry’s response to the 10th Amendment question in your second clip. What I saw was more wandering, stumbling, and bumbling – even putting aside the 16th century gaffe. The narrative about Perry in the debates is that he seems to get tired as they go along. We’ll here he shows that if an idea takes him more than a few sentences to elucidate he appears to get tired, looses his train of thought (gets lost), goes off on tangents, and starts stumbling. It’s actually hard to watch. Sometimes I get Bush 43 flashbacks when watching him and there’s already enough there to support the Bush II claims. No need to add to them.

            Look. If communications skills, debates performances, etc. are not key, then explain why the Perry campaign has cratered in the last few weeks. Everybody GOP candidate up there has their share of conservative heresies, but Perry is in a nose dive. I don’t think it’s because of Gardasil, in state tuition for illegals, or ponzi schemes.

            Back to a previous argument – I don’t think that in this war a candidate can afford to concede any battlefield were they may be week and only focus on the ones where they may be strong and expect to “get er done”. This is especially true if one on you only strengths is retail politics out on the trail. This is true in my mind for many reasons – one of the main ones is lack of exposure while you on you A-game.

          • TSquared

            Looks like my fingers were stumbling and bumbling on the keyboard there… Next I’ll be compared to 43.

          • explodinghead

            I don’t know who you are supporting, but I saw the video of Cain answering Greta van Susteren on the Iranian assassination plot last night and he really stumbled and bumbled through it. Then there was a direct comparison with Newt who hit the question out of the park.
            We are going to have to try and agree on a conservative candidate, who may not be perfect, but can go the distance, or the Romnoid is going to be the default choice, just as the Republican establishment wanted.
            If you don’t have an actual foreign policy response when the 3am call comes, that’s pretty scary.

          • TSquared

            I’ve seen other weak Cain responses too. Occasional stumbling here and there but nothing as bad as Perry. Foreign policy issues seem to be particularly problematic for him. Unprepared and inexperienced come to mind. So – all and all – Cain makes me uneasy. However, he does seem to show that he goes to school on some weaknesses when they get exposed. Does that assuage any of my uneasiness with him? I don’t know. Still keeping and open (but cautious) mind when it comes to Cain.

            I do like Newt – even taking into account some of his past heresies. I certainly think he’s the best when it comes to communications and debating. I think he would wipe the floor with Obama in debates and could certainly handle the media during the election cycle and later while in office. Oratorically, he could be a majorly effective champion for his policies and conservatism as a whole. The question about Newt is – Is he such damage goods that he could never be viable? Or could he come back from the grave – re. McCain – and surprise us all? I certainly would prefer Newt over Romney, but I can say the same about Cain, Bachmann, and perhaps Perry. Santorum…. I don’t know. Romney only beats Paul and Huntsman in my book.

          • Common_Cents

            If you don’t have a good impression of a candidate, especially a first impression, you are more apt to look for more negatives to confirm your thinking.

            People are notorious for filtering information to back up their first impression.

            That is why debates are important. It’s setting up a positive bias especially for people new to a candidate.

            Debates and ground game stumping are different.

            Nobody is saying Perry doesn’t have a ground game, but to say debates don’t matter is evidence of denial.

          • Aaron Gardner

            Especially in the primary when ground game and organization matter the most.

            Cain has almost zero organization. This is a fact. Romney has a very strong organization in NH, this is also a fact. Romney will win NH based on his organizational strength, not on his ability to lie in debates and deflect criticism.

          • wonkish1

            That they do matter and they matter a ton.

            And it appears that ground game couldn’t possibly matter as much. Because all though I do believe that a nice ground game can bump a candidate a good 5 pts better than the polls in a Caucus state like Iowa I think its pretty safe to say that national appearances have done more to benefit or hurt a candidate by 5 pts.

            Keep in mind that McCain had practically no ground game and his campaign was near broke in 08 before they won New Hampshire.

            Ground game, fundraising, endorsements, etc. matter but it appears this time its the debates that dominate the race.

          • lineholder

            He doesn’t necessarily have to have the ground game that fits into traditional political patterns to gain attention from the voters. The environment is what it is, and because of it, that plays to Cain’s advantage.

            I know, it’s a pesky little bit of truth that we don’t want to consider, but that isn’t going to magically make it go away.

            It’s one of those rare instances where the societal influences could have a significant impact on the outcomes. If the other candidates (who for all intents and purposes are being clumped into the category of politician) are consciously aware of just how significant this environment is, then it is possible that they can approach it in such a way that it is advantageous to their campaigns.

            How they come across in reference to this does matter this time. Romney will have a difficult time combating it either way he goes, simply because Romney is Romney. Perry, on the other hand, may have an opportunity to utilize this kind of environment It all depends on what kind of approach he takes.

        • Scope

          and yet you are willing to do the same thing again with a Republican candidate.

          We don’t need an orator, good hair, or someone who looks presidential. We don’t need someone who gives a good sermon and brings the people to their feet. Obama has given good sermons and brought many many to their feet. It didn’t make him and his plans and policies correct.

          • NeoKong

            Running a campaign on technical issues does bring people to the polls.
            If a candidate cannot inspire the voters to get out and do more than vote then he cannot win.

            People have to be motivated.
            They have to send money.
            They have to volunteer.
            They have to knock on doors.
            They have to phone bank.

            Cain is not Obama.
            I think we can trust Cain to do what he promises as much as is realistic but that don’t mean squat if he doesn’t win.

            You have to win.
            So take your pick.

            Do you want to win with a process you don’t like or do you want to win with a candidate you do not like?

    • TSquared

      My thoughts exactly…

      • explodinghead

        Cain has just begun to be vetted and like everyone else he is starting to crumble around the edges. It’s early to decide yet.
        Or are you both suggesting that we take Romney, who will begate any argument against Obamacare in the general? I’m not sure Romney can win.

    • uncmike

      You said: “I like Perry too to a degree but being a snoozer on TV is problematic because that is how most people will see him.” I disagree.

      You discount the endless political commercials that candidates will inundate potential voters with and they will watch most of them because they’re there on the tube during a commercial break.

      It is true that some people will clearly watch the debates, especially in the final stages of a campaign, either for the nomination or for the job itself, but just as many probably won’t watch them at all.

      And then there are the endless political rallies and campaign events, and the television coverage they generate. That too will be plastered on television sets across the country. Most of that stuff is canned and makes the candidates look good–look what those staged events did for “The Won.”

      What I’m saying is that I think you give far too much weight to these early debates–really, how many people who are not political junkies watched the one last night?

  • tngal

    the man is good, and has had me on board for quite awhile. Cannot trust romney or perry at this point. We’ve seen them both and know their records in their home states. They seem to be holding a lot back. Lot of vague, not enough details in their national plans. And what few details we are certain of, carry bacggage. Romney is too mod for many conservatives and truthfully so is Perry. None of the candidate’s are perfect, but herman’s fresh and honest. I like newt but he doesn’t have the pull this time around. Unfortunately neither does bachman or santorum. Still questioning how huntsman qualifies as republican. Having a big tent is one thing, unlocking a stadium is a whole different matter.

    • explodinghead

      I live in Texas and can tell you that many Texas Democrats are actually more pro-life, pro-second amendment and pro-liberty than the majority of North-eastern Republicans. A lot of them vote Democrat because their family always voted Democrat. Perry is not a moderate, he clings to his gun, his bible and his lower taxes just like the rest of us. Please don’t lump him in the same pool as Romney.

  • gnorc

    then the last time they were raised would have been 2009 or 2010. Even on the evil “THEM” (top income bracket), raising marginal rates is far tougher than people seem to give it credit for. Imagine how much tougher it would be if raising taxes on the evil “THEM” increased taxes on everyone, too!

    What is easy is manipulating the loopholes: the deduction, credits, and subsidies to make most people pay more, while selling it as “targeted tax cuts.”

    Raising excise taxes is also easy, due to how easily the product can be demonized (booze, cigs, gambling, gas-guzzlers, etc.). When that same tax increase would also increase taxes of groceries, then it becomes light years more difficult.

    The one “9″ that seems to me to be easy to raise is the corporate tax part, since it is still the evil “THEM” that would be targeted. The simple way around it would be to merge corporate and individual taxes into a single system. That would make “9-9-9″ into “9-9.”

    (btw, this is my first post here, so I hope I “introduced” myself well.)

    • badspotteddog

      @gnorc, welcome!
      Please check the details here.

      http://www.hermancain.com/999plan

      and since 999 is a prelude to the Fair Tax, here

      fairtax.org

      • gnorc

        One of the reasons I first liked Cain was his support of the Fair Tax, but I rarely heard anything about how people would handle the transition, since you can’t just go right from the current system to the Fair Tax. Otherwise, you will have products with the current tax code baked in their prices AND a Fair Tax on top of it (full double taxation on every new product). So, I was very happy when Cain introduced a transition plan.

  • jerry39

    These reasons for abandoning him don’ t make a lot of sense to me. First, there were many of us who didn’t’ buy the rational e for TARP and who still don’t. But at the time, we were practically conspiracy theorists because it was nearly impossible to find anybody anywhere disagreeing with the premise that Armageddon would occur if we didn’t do TARP. I have yet to hear the definitive rebuking of that premise even in retrospect. Who’s really out there who has consistently said that not doing TARP would have been better – Ron Paul?

    I also think its easier to have been contrarian if you didn’t actually have a vote on TARP. Who knows what Rick Perry does if he’s sitting in the White House dealing with 1000 chicken little’s who are supposed to be the experts in these matters?

    As to both Perry’s issues on immigration and Cain’s TARP, we must remember (among other things) that Romney supported Cap and Trade in 2008. There is your true propensity to be “big government” given a good narrative. A lot of smart conservatives bought into the need for TARP, whereas Cap and Trade has always been a BS government power and money grab designed for big government types to suppor while looking like they’re saving the planet.

    The federal government would never take over General Motors, Force manufacturers to build in Union friendly states, overthrow benign and even friendly dictators, ect. We will never see housing prices drop year over year for three straight years. We can’t be on the verge of violent communisto “protests” in our cities. Etc.

    To not like 9,9,9 because you believe it can’t get passed is to say that government is so irreparably broken that good ideas and their proponents should be shunned in favor of those who understand we are stuck with the status quo. In a four year time frame we have seen every sort of “bad idea” become a reality despite conventional wisdom that these sorts of things just couldn’t happen here. It seems to me conservatives of every stripe, including Ron Paul and Sarah Palin fans, plus independents, and even the more honest Wall-Street protesters could get behind a 9-9-9 plan. The fact that it is corruptible is so self-evident that it is hardly a negative. Everything is corruptible, so what’s the point?

    At this point it’s Perry, Cain, and an outside chance of Gingrich to oppose Romney. They all have weaknesses that pale in comparison to Romney’s. But we have been so focused on tearing down the Romney opposition and eliminating them one by-one based on these weaknesses, that Romney’s say nothing serious and try to capture the mood of the day starts looking better.

    I fear we’re on the way to talking ourselves into Romney.

    • jrhode2873

      This is very well said. Your points are very good especially the part about tearing down every anti-Romney opponent. Why are we doing that???

      • jerry39

        I think there is a fine line between vetting these candidates and falling into the trap of circling back to Romney just because the evidence of his weaknesses are more removed in time. He is a chameleon and a solid speaker/debtor, and so we should expect him to perform admirably in the debates – but we shouldn’t assume we suddenly have the “real Romney” and that he is what he purports to be.

  • Risky

    The big, big reason that conservatives should support tax simplification is that when the left goes to try and raise taxes (which they will) then they can’t pull the smoke and mirrors because there are only a handful of rates and thresholds that every voter can see and understand. Sure sales tax is another tax rate that could be raised, but its not one you can raise while claiming you aren’t somehow and every voter can see where it comes out of their pocketbook. If every new government program had to be paid for with an increase in national sales tax then you’d see how a big spending rep fancies explaining himself come election time!

    As for cutting payroll tax, ask any employer where they account for payroll tax in their books – yep it’s under wages, it’s part of the cost of employing people. If the payroll tax is 10% then it costs $110 to give you $100 of salary. It’s not some tax on the employer that comes out of some other pot of money.

  • carolynr

    The stuff that made America great is what we should be concentrating on. Who is the candidate that shows us the proof? Perry. What is our problems in the USA? JOBS. Well..he has the proof. What about this ridiculous Cap and Trade. More evidence out today that there is more skepticism about it. What was Perry’s words…the science is unsettled. People…it’s a ANOTHER SLUSH FUND TAX. Energy. WOW. Yep…you don’t pay more at the pump you can buy more groceries. If energy prices go down, we pay less because it cost less to bring goods and services to the marketplace. Jobs…Natural Gas, Clean Coal and Gasoline without the darn corn in it will make our cars last longer. BTW…natural gas fuels our commerical vehicles…it is cheap. So…if it costs less in all these area…YOU HAVE MORE OF YOUR OWN MONEY.

    One of the things that made our country great was common sense. I believe I have it. I can’t be bought. and I can make up my own mind. I don’t vote for people because the GOP or the WSJ or Fox tell me to do it…I use my common sense.

  • aeaeren

    quick note, the one thing that I still remember from the debate today is “9 9 9 for JOBS, JOBS, JOBS” Simple and catchy.

    Now the issue of stopping it from being abused. Well you would have to introduce the balance budget admenement first, I would also suggest slipping some starting from zero balance budget wording into it. You would have to POUND the Congress with American People helping to get them to even consider doing it. Then again it is all nice theory because it will NEVER EVER EVER EVER happen. Once they get a tax, fee, what ever they want to call it they NEVER let it go!

  • badspotteddog

    999 is just phase I of introducing the fair tax.

    I think it will work .. and Cain with his supporters (who grow by leaps and bounds every time he speaks) will be able to get it passed if anyone can.

    Yes … precautions would be taken to make sure the libs couldn’t run with new taxes.

    http://www.hermancain.com/999plan

  • cwilson

    I’m no wall street titan or financial whiz like Francis Cianfrocca (who, if I recall correctly, supported TARP), but Cain is right on one thing: the TARP law that Congress passed was completely different than the TARP that W’s Treasury Sec. Paulson (and later, Timmy Geithner) implemented. Me, I think BOTH forms were wrong-headed, but there IS a difference.

    The Congressionally-authorized TARP was a program where the Treasury would pay $$ to the financial firms and banks, and flat-out buy their worthless mortgage backed securities (MBS). There was some argument about how much above market value — or how much discount below “face” value, if any — they (that is, we) would pay for them. The point was to take these liabilities off their hands, and fill those hands with cash — thus improving the balance sheets of those banks and preventing them from having to do fire sales of other, perfectly good, investment vehicles in order to raise cash. (Such a firesale would depress prices on THOSE, thus spreading the contagion). Still a bad idea, IMO.

    However, what Henry (and Geithner) did as soon as they got the money, was to instead buy up (newly issued?) preferred stock in the troubled firms. By buying newly-issed stock, the $$ went directly to the banks. However, by issuing new shares (even if they were just “preferred” — that is, non-voting — shares), this action diluted the value of the shares held by all the existing investors. Some banks didn’t want to do this — hence those behind-closed-doors meetings from which it was later reported that the Treas. Sec. directly threatened the bank CEOs, with a godfatherish “offer you can’t refuse”.

    The idea behind this action was that we could then later sell those shares — either on the open market or back to the banks — once the stock prices stabilized and the banks managed to (over time) work off their bad debts and deleverage themselves. This would, it was hoped, reduce the total final cost (to the taxpayer) of the program. IMO, it was just another bad idea, making the government a stockholding investor in the banking industry (look up the definition of ‘fascism’ for why it’s a bad idea).

    But since option one is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT thing than option two, it is possible for someone, like Cain, to say he supported one but not the other.

    You have a point that bureaucrats always morph their directed authority into something else, but rarely has it ever been SO vast, and SO blatant, and SO immediate. “Thanks for the $700B to buy valueless MBS from the banks. I will now use it to buy stock in the banks instead.” (Wait, what?)

    • californiagold

      Contrary to what many claim, TARP alone didn’t save the economy from collapse.Nor was TARP money anywhere near the amount spent by the federal reserve QE programs directed at Wall St. and multinational banks. The big banks didn’t start to thaw until after Bernanke took action in 2009.

    • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

      Correct analysis.

      You should add that Cain may have had it backwards, in that the original TARP really was a sorry and bad idea: Buying bad debt was just ripe for ‘gaming’ by private sector, *and* it would have refunded ALL the investors from foreign sovereign wealth firms, etc.

      The Europeans are learning this WRT Greece. They keep throwing money trying to bailout out a bankrupt country. Give up on it.

      The REAL ‘solution’ is to let the bad debt get written off, but then make up the losses by giving banks more liquidity … and that’s what they did, with the govt money.

      This was quicker, gave more $$ leverage, and stabilized the “Too Big to fail” without bailing out hedge funds and others. It also was done in a way that let banks still be banks, it was not direct nationalization – we owne preferred shares.

      So I would argue that Paulson’s original proposal was a bad idea, but what they ended up implementing was better. Last point: It paid for itself. Banks recovered so the value of the TARP infusions recovered and we got our money back.

      However, it also did NOT save the country from ‘meltdown’ or recession… that happened anyway and it might not have been any worse without government doing what it did. In the end, govt intervention has only added to uncertainty.

  • swamphermit

    Republican party seems full of them today. “Smaller” gov’t, but lets keep the IRS.

    Also, the 50% not paying income tax should get a bigger tax refund…

    • JSobieski

      If you have a national sales tax (which would involve a rate above 20%), the incentive to cheat on expensive transactions will be substantial.

      It is far easier to identify tax cheats using an aggregate measure such as income than it is by monitoring exponentially more common transactions.

      Most people have only one or two sources of income, while engaging in thousands of transactions in a year.

      State sales tax, unlike the FAIR tax, excludes a lot of stuff in many states. Moreover, state sales tax rates are below 10% in most places.

      Conservativism is anti-utopian in thinking. We acknowledge the administrative challenges to what in theory sounds great. I readily admit that from an economic standpoint, a consumption tax is superior to an income tax. However, from an administrative standpoint, it isn’t.

  • redmother

    Why are there only three candidates being considered here? Ron Paul and Gary Johnson, even Michelle Bachman are viable candidates. Do you want to have a real impact on Washington or would you be satisfied with anyone who has an “R” after their name, who wouldn’t change a thing? Are you afraid of real change I wonder? I just don’t understand why you and the main stream media, including Fox News, are only focusing on Romney and Perry, and lately, Cain.

    • Bill S

      .

  • tea4me

    …he sounds better and better with every debate

  • californiagold

    Both the NBC and PPP polls show Herman Cain jumping to the lead.

    The NBC poll shows a tight race between Cain, Romney, and Perry, whereas the PPP shows Cain with a big lead over Romney and Perry.

    The good news for Perry supporters is that at least in one poll, Perry is close to Romney. The bad news for Perry and Romney fans is that Herman Cain’s candidacy can no longer be taken as a flavor of the month.

    • lineholder

      about exactly what it is that is bogging down Perry’s campaign

      http://hotair.com/archives/2011/10/12/lightning-strikes-twice-cain-27-romney-23-perry-16-paul-11/

      Apparently a piece of public policy that was implemented back home scares the you-know-what out of people on a national level.

      • californiagold

        …we already have discussed that over and over. The fact is, while Perry hasn’t handled the explanation of his policy correctly, I have no doubt that Perry would be far tougher on illegal immigration than Romney or Cain.

        By the way, it might be interesting if someone in the media looked into Cain’s past and then reported what Burger King’s policy was on hiring illegals while Cain was running things.

        • lineholder

          This isn’t Cain’s problem. And it isn’t Romney’s problem. It’s Perry’s problem. He’s got a public perception problem with this one. It’s possible that he could overcome it, but sweep it under the rug by saying “Oh, but just look at what so and so did”…that doesn’t cut it. That comes across as the same old same old that politicians usually do when the public responds negatively to something and they want to direct the attention away from themselves.

          And given that this is an anti-politician environment, if Perry responds to it that way, he risks digging himself into an even deeper hole.

          • californiagold

            you didn’t make a specific point.

            As for Perry, I disagree with his campaign’s theory that debates don’t matter. Or that TV interviews don’t matter. Perry seems to be relying on retail politics and TV ads. Who knows, with 17 million he might just pull out a victory anyway if Cain implodes.

            I was one of the first posters on RS to suggest Perry would have a problem with his immigration policies if he were to run. And that’s exactly what has happened. Although Perry was correct in his assumption that it is heartless to throw those people on the streets, he didn’t anticipate such a hostile response from his core supporters. The sad thing is, Romney is far worse on immigration than Perry.

          • lineholder

            I didn’t want to make a big production out of this, so I guess I was trying to be subtle (which isn’t my strong point)

            It’s not so much a deliberate hostility at Perry personally as it is that unemployment is high, uncertainty is high, and people are a bit more protective of their own livelihoods than they might be otherwise. It’s situational more than anything else.

    • Bill S

      I wouldn’t put too much stock in their stuff at this point.

      • californiagold

        While it’s true that PPP has a history with DailyKos, during the last few election cycles PPP has been surprisingly accurate. More so than some of the network polls.

  • tea4me

    What’s that? An extra $36K on a $400K home?

    Sure doesn’t work well with me…

  • californiagold

    Maybe the reason Perry has yet to show his cards, is that he’s allowing the media to pick apart Cain’s plan that includes a huge new tax increase.

    Perry now has the chance to take the good parts of Cain’s plan and eliminate the bad parts.

  • BA Cyclone

    “Herman Cain can’t win” with the FairTax plan, because “we’ll never repeal the 16th Amendment” to get rid of the personal income tax.

    So he creates the 9-9-9 plan. Well, “Herman Cain can’t win” with that either, because “WE WOULD HAVE BROKEN THE SEAL!!” on national sales taxes, without first doing impossible task #1 above.

    So what should Herman Cain do, propose a flat income tax now? Then the peanut gallery will say “Herman Cain can’t win” because “a flat tax will never stay flat” when Congress is in charge.

    So, why should any sane person propose any plan other than just keeping what we have?

    At least Herman Cain has a bold, relatively simple plan. That is 100% better than any other serious candidate for President.

    There are things to like, and things to not like. I think you should judge it against the real alternative, which is the current monstrosity of a tax code, rather than the mythical unicorn fairy dust plan that “everyone will like” and never gets undone by future Congress critters.

    All we can do is all we can do. At some point we need to have someone who is bold enough to lead and help tear up the current code for something flatter and fairer — and THEN is it up to We the People to work hard to keep it that way.

    That might sound naive, but structurally Herman Cain is right about that. We only get the government we deserve — the government we choose to work for — if we keep choosing the easy populist way we continue down the road we are already on.

  • jiminga

    I’ve commented elsewhere on 9-9-9 but wanted to highlight the TARP discussion. TARP is an acronym for Troubled Asset Relief Program. Someone please correct me if I’m wrong, but the main tenet of the program was to create a “bad bank” that would buy the toxic loans and store them until some future date when the market would recover enough to sell them, providing a recovery of the funds or even a profit. As we all know, that never happened and the government just showered the banks and investment banks with money, as well as bailing out selected (unionized) private industries.

    So Cain’s comment about how TARP was administered is appropriate. The original idea had merit but the implementation was pure corruption. This is just one of the many laws violated by this administration.

  • Pingback: free music downloader

  • Pingback: used ABB robots

  • Pingback: online residual income

  • Pingback: Blog minion

  • Pingback: Mas info en

  • Pingback: ketones review

  • Pingback: Where To Buy African Mango

  • Pingback: personalised colouring books

  • Pingback: Debt Help

  • Pingback: Recomendado

  • Pingback: view the best bodybuilding pictures

  • Pingback: Global Teak Furniture

  • Pingback: Stop Bullying

  • Pingback: http://chizai-wiki.jp/wiki/index.php?title=Vacation_Weight_Loss_Tips.

  • Pingback: bookmaker free bets

  • Pingback: tabata training

  • Pingback: fat loss factor

  • Pingback: uk sports betting

  • Pingback: gadgets

  • Pingback: Mileage Corrections

  • Pingback: wholesale Franklin & Marshall clothing

  • Pingback: Asics Running Shoes

  • Pingback: sexy bikinis

  • Pingback: belstaff online

  • Pingback: post free link

  • Pingback: Male Enhancement Products

  • Pingback: Secure your online privacy

  • Pingback: op ed submission

  • Pingback: rabbit cages

  • Pingback: how to build backlinks

  • Pingback: african mango review

  • Pingback: affordable highmark health insurance

  • Pingback: aion kinah

  • Pingback: gotowanie

  • Pingback: backlinks kaufen

  • Pingback: Dressesonlinesales

  • Pingback: Welded Razor Wire Fence

  • Pingback: business shirts

  • Pingback: The Secret book by Rhonda Byrne

  • Pingback: samsung chromebook reviews

  • Pingback: dubturbo review

  • Pingback: WarZ Items

  • Pingback: home business

  • Pingback: computers software

  • Pingback: Investing In Bali

  • Pingback: john thomas financial

  • Pingback: maitland chiropractic

  • Pingback: Compre e venda produtos de A a Z online e tenha uma loja como afiliado

  • Pingback: john thomas financial

  • Pingback: john thomas financial

  • Pingback: sheriff gaming

  • Pingback: mr green casino review

  • Pingback: horoscopes

  • Pingback: the exterminator slot game

  • Pingback: check this out dude

  • Pingback: vitvaruservice

  • Pingback: the diet solution program review

  • Pingback: apo janitorial

  • Pingback: Janitorial Svc Seattle

  • Pingback: Seattle Janitorial Service

  • Pingback: all good

  • Pingback: 2013 Formal Dress

  • Pingback: ipad

  • Pingback: 420 Van Nuys

  • Pingback: Joe Francis

  • Pingback: swimming pools

  • Pingback: nigGer

  • Pingback: metatrader

  • Pingback: Paslode Im350

  • Pingback: Betsoft slot demo games

  • Pingback: Big Island Tours

  • Pingback: "Pinolenic Acid pinnothin wholesale dropship"

  • Pingback: olive garden coupons

  • Pingback: lida satis

  • Pingback: john thomas financial

  • Pingback: nigeria premier league

  • Pingback: product for acne

  • Pingback: trade in forex market

  • Pingback: capitol heights locksmith

  • Pingback: Lumsden Terry Tacoma Accident Lawyer

  • Pingback: abc blinds

  • Pingback: Military flag display cases

  • Pingback: Michele Kief

  • Pingback: gel ice packs for shipping