« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Herman Cain: I Endorse Mitt Romney

By: streiff (Diary)  |  September 29th, 2011 at 11:44 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

That’s not exactly what he said but that is what it amounted to.

Yesterday, Herman Cain, a contender for the GOP presidential nomination, announced that he would not support Texas Governor Rick Perry for president.

Herman Cain said Wednesday that he would be unable to support Rick Perry for president if the Texas governor were to eventually win the party’s nomination.

“Today, I could not support Rick Perry as the nominee for a host of reasons,” Cain said on CNN.

He cited specifically Perry’s support for in-state tuition breaks for the children of illegal immigrants.

This is little short of stunning considering Romney’s own turning a blind eye to “sanctuary cities” in Massachusetts.

Barring a deus ex machina type intervention the GOP nominee is going to be either Mitt Romney or Rick Perry. There is no doubt that Cain has gained some strength in the polls. Whether that strength is pro-Cain or a message being sent to the two front runners that they are inadequately conservative remains to be seen. Regardless, the candidates should not lose sight of the fact that the mission is to turf out Obama and his fellow travelers.

Even Mitt Romney, who also benefited from the endorsement of Tim Pawlenty when his campaign sputtered out, indicates he will support the eventual GOP nominee. Again from The Hill:

Other Republicans have shied away from similar statements, arguing that even a Republican with whom they have divergent views would be preferable to President Obama. Speaking at the Republican debate last weekend, Romney — responding to a question about which of his fellow panelists he might tap as vice president — said that any of his fellow candidates would qualify.

“You want someone who without question could become the president of the United States. These people could all fill that — that position. Any one of them would be a better president than what we have now,” Romney said.

Curiously, while Cain holds the decision by the Texas Legislature on in state tuition policy for illegal immigrants to be anathema he is unconcerned about Romney’s signature role in mucking up the Massachusetts health system so long as Romney promises to repeal ObamaCare.

Cain really needs to reconsider this comment. He’s bought a lot of good will in the GOP and the conservative movement. He has proven adept at articulating a conservative vision and in driving the nomination process in the correct direction. It is very difficult, however, to see a path to the nomination for him. It would be a shame to lose his voice if Rick Perry is nominated.

 

Get Alerts

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • ru4fred

    Some of these so called Reagan Republicans ought to familiarize themselves with Regan’s views on immigration. Just for the heck of it I will list some.

    All Republican candidates say they are like Reagan, but are they. Reagan hated communism, not because he hated Russians or Chinese, but because of what communism did to the human soul. He also hated the welfare system for the same reason?it crushes one?s soul. He loved freedom and liberty. He hoped for freedom for all, including immigrants. He granted amnesty to illegal aliens in 1986.

    Reagan on immigration in his own words.

    In announcing his presidential candidacy in Nov. 1979, he had proposed a ?North American accord? in which commerce & people would move freely across the borders of Canada & Mexico.

    Peter Robinson, a former Reagan speechwriter, agrees. “It was in Ronald Reagan’s bones ? it was part of his understanding of America ? that the country was fundamentally open to those who wanted to join us here.”

    Reagan said as much himself in a televised debate with Democratic presidential nominee Walter Mondale in 1984. “I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and lived here, even though some time back they may have entered illegally,” he said.

    In a debate at the Women?s Voter Forum in 1980, Ronald Reagan responded to a question about whether the U.S. should allow the children of undocumented immigrants to be in public schools by noting that immigration has to be dealt with in a comprehensive and humane way. Reagan reminded debate viewers that immigrants who are working here are going to be paying taxes here too and dismissed the idea of a border fence.

    REAGAN: Rather than talking about putting up a fence, why don?t we work out some recognition of our mutual problems? Make it possible for them to come here legally with a work permit. And then, while they?re working and earning here they can pay taxes here. And then when they want to go back, they can go back. Open the borders both ways.

    Perry is the only candidate even close to Reagan on immigration. He is closest to Reagan’s views on most issues.

    • freentn

      Traitorous statements on CNN Wolf Blitzer’s Show and make up your own minds, Conservatives:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6g5OxJuM-M

      • Aaron Gardner

        All done now.

        • freentn

          You are entitled to your opinion. I am entitled to mine, so don’t lecture me Aaron, I will think what I think. Say what I mean and mean what I say.

          cain is a traitor to the Republican Party IMHO.

          • Bill S

            I’d listen to both Aaron and streiff. You need to dial it down.

            That’s not really an idle suggestion either.

          • freentn

            That is all I need to know about Cain. He is OFF my list.

          • powertothepeople

            that Aaron was not lecturing you, he was simply stating a fact that as a front page contributor and moderator, he is letting you know you have no rights to post here and that you will either conform to the site and its rules, or go post your moronic BS elsewhere due to your removal and ban from this site.

            Now was the simply enough for even a dimwit like you to understand?

          • streiff

            you’d be well advised to stop talking long enough to listen.

          • freentn

            out of my vocabulary. Thank you for the polite admonishment.

          • Aaron Gardner

            nt

      • kenchely

        would you point out what the traitorous statement is there? I didn’t hear any when I listened to your link.

    • nepanyrush

      Reagan wanted to set up a way for immigrants to come only legally to the US. He put forth a policy that would make current illegal immigrants legal but only on condition that further illegal immigration would be stopped and businesses would not be allowed to employ illegal immigrants. It did not work, of course, but that was his intent and I backed it at the time, thinking it would be a logical way to put a system in place to stop illegal immigration.

      Perry set up a system that would further incentivize illegal immigration, not stop it.

      I am beginning to wonder if Perry has more warts than we realize. I have backed him (the immigration is not a big issue for me), but it does seem that a lot of leaders I respect (Santorum– I am from PA-, Bachman, Pawlenty, and now Cain) really have a problem with him that they do not have with Romney. And it seems that a lot of things Perry had done rub conservatives the wrong way — in-state tuition for illegal aliens, mandatory vaccination for a sexually transmitted disease, etc. Combined with his poor debating skills, I am not sure he is someone that should cause such passionate support that people on this site try to support in-state tuition for illegal aliens and denigate the others running for office in their effort to support Perry. Now that I have watched him in the debates and heard some of his policies, he seems like he has a lot more warts than I realized.

      • streiff

        the fact is that Reagan controlled INS and the federal law enforcement apparatus. He did nothing after the bill was passed to crack down on illegal immigration.

        You are going to find that most border state governors are not very hard core on immigration for a lot of good reasons.

        • ru4fred

          (even illegal immigrants) and it showed. Santorium and many other republicans appear to hate people, and it also shows. Perry is a great governor of a huge border state. Perry apologized for saying some republicans don’t have a heart. He should have said they don’t have a brain. Why in the world would a child brought illegally to Texas as a minor, and who attends a texas elementary, middle, and high school, not be eligible for instate tuition. What future do you want for these kids. And for all you nonborder state republicans…there are a lot of these kids. Some republicans could actually lose a state like Texas.

          • freentn

            !

          • freentn

            forsake the Hispanic Republican and Independent vote in pursuit of cain’s illusory Black vote.

      • msbs05

        The reason they have a problem with Perry has more to do with Perry is the conservative they are competing with, Romney isnt. Everyone knows this race will come down to Romney and some conservative. Cain and Bachmann’s best chance of winning Iowa and SC and becoming the “some conservative” is putting Perry down and making people like you get concerned. It is tactical, not idealilogical. For me, the very fact they attack Perry shows that Perry is a conservative, sort of opposite of you.
        Cain is going to be shown to have lots of warts soon too. Besides the Muslim issue, his 999 plan will hurt badly in conservative states like TX and TN, who have no income tax but heavy state sales taxes. I already pay over 9% on my groceries. Cain’s plan will make that more than 18%. That is a heavy fine for each grocery visit and I am not sure it is a good idea. With 50% not paying income tax now and having to add that tax on at the cash register, his plan will lose support quickly with independants and the left, not to mention the right in states like mine (TN has highest sales tax in nation). Cain also doesnt want to audit the Fed and since he used to work there, you will see libertarian support dry up there also.
        Perry’s ideas on the border are more logical than Bachmann, Santorum and Cain. How are they going to build a fence all the way. Will they seize the TX ranchers land to put it up? How then will the ranchers water their cattle? Do they run the fence through the river? What does that do to fishing and tourism in those areas? Do we seize the land of Native Americans and cancel our treaties with them so we can build across their land? Building the fence is a great soundbite, but is not practical and it shows that the other candidates touting it have not thought this thru (because they dont live in border state) or they are lying about their intent just to get elected.
        I know he did not do well in the debate. Cain is radio guy used to quick thinking and talking, romney has been running forever, Bachmann just brings up Obamacare every question instead of answering, Santorum I love, but he looks angry up there on the attack. Perry will get better and I know he will because I have seen him speak so many times and he was awe-inspiring. I love to hear him speak, where he gets to speak from the heart. He is better at that than any of them. I am not willing to desert Perry yet, he wasnt that bad. I agree with what I know of him and I think he will be only one to take on Romney, who I would only support begrudgingly to get rid of Obama. I really do not want another moderate, blah republican candidate. I was so upset with McCain last time until he gave us Sarah. This time we need to get it right.

        • msbs05

          in that Perry is the only one advocating using drones on the border, which is sooo good a solution when added with the extra boots on the ground he wants. My hubby and son have both served with military over there and the drones give amazing data that is instantly useful, more useful than the fence an illegal can go under or over. Just watch Border Wars for a few episodes and you will see it is human agents on the ground that will really protect us. I think enhancing it with military grade drones will be the best combination for the best security. We have limited resources to spend and we can spend it on a fence or on Perry’s plan. I chose Perry.

    • http://www.patriotactionnetwork.com/profile/semperfi sirjason

      I believe Herman Cain made a huge mistake in his statement about Rick Perry and subsidizing illegal alliens’ education! Why? If he happens to take the lead from RP and the race becomes Romney v Cain… he would need RP’s endorsement to defeat Romney!

      I do not believe Cain can rely upon this now because of his statement. It was totally dumb!

    • harryvarden

      Not sure if Ronald Reagan would agree with the “comprehesnive plan” that Dubya tried to pass while he was in office. Back then, we had only 3 millions illegals.

    • perry4prez

      This post has given me a lot of food for thought. I used to think Governor Perry was wrong to support in-state tuitition for illegals but maybe we should re-think that. As I have stated earlier he is right on the Border Fence, that is a property rights issue for the farmers and ranchers who live along the border.

  • tailfins1959

    I am learning to evaluate a candidate AFTER being taken to the woodshed. Cain has not yet come under scrutiny. He will trip and be taken to the woodshed. Perry has already taken his lumps and will likely learn from it. All the candidates are human (except Gary Johnson (R-Area 51). I expect them to mess up. How they recover will determine who the nominee is.

  • paulplantowin

    in certain contexts. I kind of lump most of his unforced errors into the category of lack of experience with high profile media exposure.
    Good news, bad news scenario IMO
    Good news, you get pretty honest gut reactions from him, rather than focus group tested smoothness.
    Bad news, this opens him up to criticism. Often properly.
    So far he has corrected his flaws pretty well. He seems to take fair criticism and learn from it.
    I still have heard no deal breakers – I still think he is better than the other options overall.
    Hopefully he will make less of these errors over time.

    • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

      It will be eventually explained that he meant to say that he does not support Perry’s nomination for president (duh), but that if Perry were the nominee, Cain would support him.

      I’ve seen this many times in campaigns past. Does anybody really think that Cain would hold the values he does and vote for 0bama? Ronald Reagan’s headstone would govern better than The Won.

  • Tbone

    On several occasions now he has made comments that have revealed a lack of political savvy.

    I mean, what possible good does it do to say you won’t support a legitimate Republican who wins the Party’s nomination?

    It would seem that Cain has just closed out gaining support from those who nominally support Perry.

    BTW, I assume Herm is now banned from RedState?

    • streiff

      in the tank for Romney. This is part of us getting on the NRO-KLo-thighsweat bandwagon for Romney.

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

        conservatives if he gets the nomination by being strong on illegal immigration at the federal level. His policies as governor will not be relevant at that point.

        • rightwingmom52

          by me and others, but has pretty much been ignored. Apparently words matter to some – not so much to others.

          • Scope

            Some have considered that Cain said “today.” The question has been posed, what does that mean. What does Perry have to change or do to garner his support? Does he expect Perry to change any positions he has taken, and then be seen as a flip flopper or unprincipled. Is it not fair to ask those questions?

          • Scope

            some things he has said. Why not asking Cain to walk back saying he could not support him if he became the nominee, if it is today or next year?

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

            that he would support the nominee given how bad is Obama. Plus, given that Perry did walk back the “heartless” comment, the process is already happening.

            The main questions that remain, imho, with respect to Perry is whether his heart for illegals and hater of cancer translates into another Bush-like compassionate Big Government conservative.

            I suspect he can calm those fears.

            Cain has a lot more questions to answer on policy given his lack of a governing record.

            FTR, I can accept any of the top 3 with enthusiasm, and most of the rest as well…except for Paul due to weakness on defense.

          • Scope

            with saying that Cain would support the nominee given how bad Obama is, when to my knowledge Cain has not walked back his statement at all?

            I must also ask you, in light of all your comments here about supporting the “safety net” for those that really need it, and there are many that do, would you tell those that need medical care, or food, because they may be illegal, that sorry our safety net only should take care for our own American citizen humans, not illegal ones? In light of all your past positions, unless I’m misunderstanding you, there are those that should be taken care of in dire situations, but, there are others that don’t deserve that same consideration. Have you not been a “compassionate conservative” with the particular issues you have talked about, with respect to the “safety nets”?

            Please define what you are saying.

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

            Cain will be given an “out” as time passes and Perry gets into more detail. History is also a good guide on this semi-Cockstradamus prediction.

            Any safety net erected by Americans will care for any truly needy child of God in our presence, and should. Before Medicare and Medicaid, Christian America had already erected a safety net. Hope you saw my column defense of Paul and attack on the Media’s “let them die” BS from the debate a few weeks ago in which I defended organized religion pre-Medicare/caid…

            I would add that I have no problem with a long-term plan to shift safety nets from federal to state, state to local and government to private charity OVER TIME with transition and am NOW for reducing government payments on same NOW. We haven’t the money and the main thing keeping medical costs un-affordable is federal government involvement and state monopolies in the health ins market.

            more later if this doesn’t answer your question in full.

          • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

            I’ll have to remember that one.

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

            for several years…smile

          • rightwingmom52

            .
            .

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

            nt

          • rightwingmom52

            Never said otherwise.

            And yes, some have considered that Cain said “today” but many have left that out, whether intentionally or not, I don’t know. Is it fair to leave “today” out of the discussion? In my opinion, both words and context matters.

            I read the entire transcript and formed my opinion of what I think Cain meant. If others need a clarification from Cain or any other candidate on what they’ve said, I see no problem in asking.

          • freentn

            spin of transcripts of cain’s meaning the video of cain’s interview on CNN Wolf Blitzer’s Show speaks for itself. Conservatives can watch it and make up their own minds

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6g5OxJuM-M

        • gekster

          Cain said to a direct question from blitzed,
          “Today, I could not support Rick Perry for a host of reasons,”
          And then went on to name a few reasons.
          He did not say “I would not support”.
          He did not say “I would never support”.
          He did not say he “I would ever support”.

          The key word here “Today”. Not tomorrow, not next year, not yesterday, not last year,
          (see where I’m going) but right now, during this time the sun is lighting the earth in the part of it which I am in. Is that clear.
          Put that word with,
          “I could not support” Means that there is something that is stopping him from supporting.

          Put together with today and you have, “Today, I could not support,”
          Meanig that as of “today” there is something stopping him from support..
          That is not to say that he hasn’t left it open to his support in the furure.
          It is clearly implied that his support may come in the future..

          If he had said ,
          “I would not support”
          “I would never support”.
          “I would ever support”.
          then all you people could have a cow, and it might be right to do so.

          • streiff

            Cain’s values? His price?

            The reasons he says he won’t support Perry exist. He can’t change them.. He has addressed the issues verbally so it isn’t like he’s just ignoring these reasons.

            So what can change tomorrow to get Cains’ support?

            Plus, there is no evidence that Cain says anything that needs the reading of goat’s entrails to decipher.

          • tyman

            Herb said the same thing that he said the first time I watched it.

            He said that he couldn’t support Perry as the NOMINEE. So, does that mean that he thinks Obama would be better on immigration? Would he support a third party candidate?

            This is more than a gaffe. Cain was clear that he could not support Perry after he received the nomination. Thanks for clearing that up, Herb, that you’d prefer Obama.

            Honestly, that’s what it comes down to. Today…tomorrow…Obama is better at immigration or the rest of the issues than Perry? That’s what he said.

            “Him being soft on securing the border”…Perry hasn’t had the power to secure it, and Obama has. Has he done it? Will Obama secure it in the future? This isn’t even about Romney…it’s who Cain will support to get rid of Obama.

            This makes Perry’s “I don’t think you have a heart” comment small.

            I’d like for Perry to ask Cain in the next debate just where they differ. Cain is taking points from Romney: misrepresent what Perry says and folks will start to believe it.

            Cain has lost my support if Perry has to drop out (for health reasons, etc.). This shows that it’s still down to Perry and Romney, and as Cain said, a Mormon can’t win in the south. Thanks, Herb, for the wisdom.

          • freentn

            supporting romney and not supporting Perry were very clear.

          • gekster

            and didn’t try to read anything into them.
            Just explaining it as I see it.
            I don’t know if words have different meanings in politics, they probably do.
            I’m not trying to read hidden meanings into it.

            But me being simple, I would see that as me saying,
            Today, I could not go to the store.
            That would leave it open for tomorrow or another day to go.
            I know that is an extreme example.
            Just the way I see it,

            As for what would change Cains mind, only he could know.
            Yesterdays enemies sometimes becomes todays friends.

          • richp89

            clarification on what Perry would do at the Federal level. Maybe to discuss Perry’s views more to see if maybe there might exist some common ground.

            They both should clarify their positions; Perry on border security and Cain on his support. Does Cain mean he would not support him if he was the nominee or that he would not support him to become the nominee. Perhaps he misunderstood the question like he did with the right of return question.

            I think we all need clarification from both instead of kicking them out of the Republican party. I am not saying you are doing that. Just pointing out that some seem to protray that sentiment. As stated before they all have flaws that need to be examined.

          • freentn

            That he is too stupid to understand even most most simple questions like will you support Perry if he is the Republican nominee?

            I’ll leave it to cainBots to determine their candidates level of intelligence, but frankly I don’t think cain is stupid.

          • richp89

            Smart people make mistakes too. To classify someone who possibly misunderstood a question as not smart is absurd. My point was we should find out how he responds to the criticism before throwing him out. In otherwords give him a chance to clarify. I would hope us heartless conservatives are will to do the same for Perry. I somehow get the feeling that the Perrybits will not do the same for Cain. How strange.

            If Cain is by some grace of God in this race when it comes time for Virginians to have their voice heard then barring some unforseen realizations about him, he will likely have my vote unless someone else makes me feel better about their position. I do like the other candidates. I am not ready to condemn Perry because he said we have no heart. I don’t think that is the way he meant it. With that being said, just because I do not break camp with the candidate that I happen to favor at this moment does not in anyway make me a bot. To classify me as such is disrespectful and your Alinsky tactics will not work on me.

            At this point the only candidate that really scares me and I like many of his viewpoints is Ron Paul. I do not in any circumstances think it is a good idea for anyone to have nukes just because they want them. Especially when they have demonstrated over and over that their goal is to destroy Israel and the U.S.

          • freentn

            from a statement that he would not support a conservative Republican nominee like Perry? cain did not afford Perry any time or chance to get his support. To the contrary, cain condemned Perry for signing a Bill 11 years ago that was passed by an overwhelming majority of the Texas Legislature.

          • richp89

            As much as you would like to spin it there is not a chance on God’s green earth that Cain does not support whoever the nominee is IMHO. At the end of the day Cain cares about what happens to this country as much as you or I. Apparently that does not mean anything to you. Maybe Perry really thought that the majority of Conservative Repuclicans are heartless. Why should he be given time to recover from that? I’ll tell you why, because he is human, he gets asked tons of questions everyday. He is trying to show how he is better than a very competitive field. Because he make mistakes. Because he will likely make more mistakes. As stated before I do not believe that he meant it that way and I do not believe that Cain meant what he said the way that it seems. Perry proved my point a couple of days later when he backtracked. I guess to the Perrybots it is okay for him to be wrong but not for Cain. Good game.

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

            clear that he would not pursue such policies at the federal level. This kind of thing happens most primary seasons and what Cain’s statement does is put more pressure on Perry, and that’s a good thing.

            After 11 years as Governor, Perry will have much more ‘splainin’ to do! All this will make him a better candidate.

          • snowshooze

            If I were in competition for the same job.
            That works.

          • Tbone

            I suppose that works OK for you.

        • streiff

          as being strong on immigration from a federal point of view. I don’t see how your statement changes the obvious statement by Cain.

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

            on the issue of illegal immigration, or at least emphasize what he already is for and against even more. I seem to recall lots of candidates over the years make these “I can’t support” so and so statements, no matter the Shermanesque qualities or lack of same, only to pull a muscle holding arms high at the convention and I have no doubt that Cain would support the GOP nominee, even Perry, if he doesn’t get the nomination. But only time will tell, and I too wish he hadn’t made the statement. But i do think Perry deserves to have his feet held to the fire for his “heart” statement in addition to the statements re “hating cancer” (who doesn’t) and being “for life” in justifying the exec order on the vaccine. Reminded me of Dubya’s when someone hurts, government must act, big government rhetoric.

            And streiff, Cain deserves the wrath of streiff! Bravo…smile

    • freentn

      about romney, i.e., he does support romney for the nomination as long as romney continues to LIE to Republicans and Flip-Flop on ObamneyCare.

      See for yourselves, Conservatives:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6g5OxJuM-M

    • porkandcheese

      Gloves are off for Perry, because he doesn’t need them. Seriously, Cain for Secretary of Commerce? He overplayed his hand.

      • freentn

        is cain supporting him and smearing Perry? Maybe cain concluded that he can not win and he thought that romney/cain will be a winning ticket? Whatever the reason, cain made a HUGE mistake.

        • porkandcheese

          Of course, he doesn’t think he can win.

          • freentn

            romney and forsaking his conservative base.

            cain has been the “darling” of the LSM but that too will further erode his support among conservatives. It is offensive that he smeared Perry but the the fact that he did it on CNN Wolf Blitzer’s show is all the more offensive.

        • supergirl2911

          Cain just lost any support I might give. I had him at the top of my list, but this is just ridiculous. If there is something that Cain knows about Perry beyond what has been gone over and over, then he should state it. I cannot support a candidate that would support Romeny. Now, if he said this after the primary, that is another matter. I get it that Cain is smart and wise and professorial at times, but I think he made a mistake in saying all is bad with Perry ‘ for a host of reasons’.I have not looked up host -ever- but I think it means many, more than a few, more than several.

  • explodinghead

    Is what Cain says tantamount to supporting Obama? Now I know Cain does not support 4 more years of the One. But sound bites come back to bite you, like Perry’s “heartless” comment. Cain needs to retract his statement and say he will support whoever the GOP nominee is against Obama. (Obama doesn’t need any more help from within the GOP).

    • freentn

      would endorse BO? I certainly didn’t. I once admired colin powell greatly. I once thought that colin powell would make a great Republican President.

      After the Traitorous Statements by cain on CNN Wolf Blitzer’s Show, I smell another colin powell in our midst.

      • streiff

        you need to seriously reconsider your commenting style. It has become an item of discussion among the moderators. You probably shouldn’t want that level of attention.

        • freentn

          .

  • beach91

    to Cain’s camp from Perry’s but NOW I have serious reservations. This is a big gotcha for me now..

    • freentn

      to seeing the CNN Wolf Blitzer interview. cain is off my list now. I am still open to Newt if Perry continues to do poorly in the debates.

      • rightwingmom52

        doesn’t bother you or are you willing to overlook that one?

        What about his endorsement for Scozzafava in NY over the conservative Hoffman?

        Just trying to determine where your lines are.

        • JSobieski

          Symbolic bipartisanship is better than substantive bipartisanship.

          • rightwingmom52

            I happen not to like either (and Newt has been impressive this time around). I’m just trying to figure out freentn’s lines are drawn.

    • supergirl2911

      I could ALMOST right off how he chose Romney as a running mate in the “game” during last week’s debate. Almost. And I could ALMOST right off the gossip, true or not, that he and Romney were buddies at the debate. Almost. This is too far, too far… and it does not smell good, IMO.

      • supergirl2911

        sorry…

  • unclefred

    He was equally negative toward Romney over RomneyCare. He indicated that he was completely against any kind of mandate and that he would have to be convinced that Romney could be trusted to actually repeal Obamacare if elected. I took his objection to Romney as requiring a good deal more than just a promise of repeal, before he would support him.

    The initial question asked him about Perry was “Are you with Rick Perry when he says that he supports instate tuition for illegal immigrants in Texas?” Then he was asked about supporting Perry were he the nominee. He did not say that he would not support Rick Perry at some future time, as you accurately quote, he said that he could not support him “today”.

    I doubt very much that “today” Cain sees this as a two man race between Ronney and Perry. If you presume that Cain views Perry as appealing to conservative voters, then he needs that support to win the nomination. Perry’s weakness on immigration, real or perceived, is a hot issues with conservatives. Cain is making a key difference clear.

    I also think that should Perry become the nominee, at some date in the future Cain will actively support him. However, I also think that any chance of a Perry-Cain ticket just went up in smoke.

    • streiff

      1. He did not hold Romney’s support of RomneyCare against him. If he did one has to presume he would have said so.

      2. It is hard to see how anything Perry is going to do in the future can off set the specific reason Cain gave for not supporting him as he’s already done it.

      3. Don’t much care how Cain sees it. When you look at staff, money, and organization Cain can’t win.

      • unclefred

        Having watched the video again, we take his comments on Romney very differently, from my perspective equating his statement with a ROmney endorsement is a step to far. I guess we can agree to disagree on this.

        As for future Perry positions on immigration. Listen to Cain again. He does not say that Perry must change his position on immigration to gain Cain’s support in the future, he says with great specificity that he cannot support him as the nominee “today”. He is reserving the right to change HIS mind down the road, if this issue is still a deal breaker. What he should have said with regard to both questions about supporting someone else were they nominated was something along the lines of “Since I intend to be the nominee that is not a decision I need to make. Certainly not today”.

        3. Is true “today”, but may not be true at some point down the road. Staff, money, and organization have a way of flowing to someone who gathers momentum. Perhaps Cain can do so, perhaps not. We’ll see.

        • streiff

          The macro issue first. I like Cain but has he ever done anything to indicate he possesses the level of nuance in spoken communication that you attribute to him? Really? Of all the guys on the stage, he’s is the only one who doesn’t send me off with my thesaurus to parse his statements.

          Specifics. Romney pushes throught RomneyCare. Perry signs a piece of legislation that only received 4 dissenting vote the the TX legislature. He could have said he couldn’t support either “today” but he didn’t. He gave a big thumbs up to RomneyCare by ignoring it, and big thumbs down to in state tuition.

          Either Perry or Romney have to fold before any of those items flow to Cain because those two guys have them tied up right now.

          • unclefred

            I’m reminded of the scene in Patton where George C. Scott gets in deeper political trouble because when he named the allies he forgot to mention that Russians would participate in ending Nazi Germany.

            Your attribution of a “big thumbs up to RomneyCare by ignoring it” is exactly that, your attribution. I agree that Cain requires no thesaurus to understand what he says. Since he repeated more than once that he felt that any mandate was unacceptable for health care, it is hard for me to see how that ignores RomneyCare.

            “Romney pushes through RomneyCare”. If you look at the make up of the Mass legislature when it passed you’ll note that he could hardly have stopped it, no push was required. However it was his baby. He was responsible for jumping on it, signing it in triumph, and trying to use it as a campaign strength in 2008. He should have fought against it, vetoed it and made the legislature override his veto (which it would). The program is a disaster, and getting worse fast. Romney won’t admit the truth about RomneyCare and won’t acknowledge that it is as wrong for Mass as ObamaCare will be for the nation.

            Perry signed into law a bill that passed his legislature with overwhelming support. The law is in direct conflict with federal law, passed during the Clinton administration specifically to prevent states from doing exactly what the Texas law does. Perry endorsed the Texas law, and now stands by it and defends it as compassion. Why did Perry sign into law something that was made illegal by federal law? Should he become president what will he do about this conflict? Will he enforce the federal law, ignore it, or attempt to repeal it? What will be the enforcement policies of a Perry administration to all the various laws on immigration, not just closing the border to illegal crossing?

            Two governors playing politics with programs that are bad for their states and the nation. Both should be called out. We should get hard comprehensive answers from both. – BTW – I’ll take Perry over Romney in a heart beat, but “today” I’m holding out for better choices.

            For the record, as my prior comments here show, I try to word my comments carefully so that my intent is clear. Sadly I am not always successful. I am not trying to be cute.

          • streiff

            1. We’re not talking about what he said in the past we’re talking about one specific interview where he said he would not support Perry for president. But it is hard to see how what Romney did that was “unacceptable” allows Cain to support him but on the other hand what Perry did was so egregious that he can’t. From this we are led to the conclusion that Cain has no problem with any aspect of Roimney care or at least not as much problem as he has with in state tuition for a few thousand students in a million plus student body.

            2. The TX law is modeled on the CA law which had passed court tests. Let’s not manufacture stuff, okay? I think Perry has made clear his position on the federal role in immigration, YMMV.

            The “today” thing is a dodge. Cain either needs to make clear he will support the eventual nominee, assuming as I do that it will not be him, or he needs to get out of the race and run as an independent.

          • unclefred

            had passed tests in federal court. I had no intention of manufacturing anything. I withdraw my comments related to the conflict with federal law until I review the applicable court decision(s).

          • streiff

            I’m not making stuff up
            http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jun/06/news/sc-dc-0607-court-tuition-20110607

          • unclefred

            nt

          • freentn

            Tuition Law enacted by the TX Legislature 11 years ago.

            Senator Marco Rubio, an elected Leader of the Tea Party Movement, co-authored similar Legislation when he was a Republican Leader in the Florida Legislature an tried to get it enacted in Florida Legislature twice.

            cain’s smear of Gov Perry was a slap in the face to Republicans Leaders like Rubio, W and Jeb Bush who have worked very hard to bring Hispanics into the Republican Party.

          • freentn

            by spinning on the word “today.” He left no way for Perry to get his approval. Perry can not veto “today” a bill that was passed 11 years ago by an overwhelming of the Representatives of the People of Texas.

            On the other hand, cain gave romney a free pass on all his egregious Liberal acts and positions.

          • richp89

            I think it is good that some are speaking in clear terms. On the second point about ignoring RomneyCare; He was specifically asked about a Perry nomintation. One should not offer information they are not asked for and possibly slip up in the wording on that too. Then he would have been perceived as not supporting any Republican nominees. I don’t think any of us believe that to be true. As it is now people are making the assumption that he is endorsing RomneyCare which I personally do not believe, he stood up to Clinton in the nineties on Government Healthcare why would he now endorse it. Instead he did not wade into uncharted waters. If later on he is asked what he thinks about RomneyCare or if he would support Romney for the nomination then he can tell us what his views are at that time.

          • freentn

            Texas Legislature by an overwhelming majority 11 years ago. cain knows that. cain emphatically stated that he would not support Perry because of something that happened 11 years ago and can not be undone by Perry.

            Yet he forgives romney for all his past mistakes most notably ObamneyCare.

            cain was very clear about where he stood regarding Perry and romney. cainBots can spin all they want but any objective conservative is not going to be favorably disposed to cain after that CNN Wolf Blitzer interview.

          • supergirl2911

            Thanks for the specifics and how you contrast the issues of immigration for Perry and healthcare for Romney.

    • porkandcheese

      Cain is basically saying to Romney, “I endorsed you before, and I’ll do it again, if you make me your VP. Suddenly, Romneycare is settled, because I said so with my unimpeachable conservative credentials (radio show and no record) and my ability to deliver a third (way too generous an estimate) of the black vote.” No way would Romney pick Cain as his VP any more than Bachmann, but their egos convince them otherwise. Cain will implode like Bachmann.

      • freentn

        of the Black vote. Does any objective conservative believe that one third to one half of the 98% of Blacks who voted for BO and the dems will vote for cain? I don’t.

        I don’t want to offend anyone by repeating what the Blacks and Libs are calling cain but it is presents a good indication that cain is wrong about his expectations of his popularity among Blacks.

        • rightwingmom52

          BLITZER: You’re doing well in the polls right now but let me specifically ask you about the African-American community. Why is the Republican party basically poisoned for so many African-Americans?

          CAIN: Because many African-Americans have been brainwashed into not being open-minded, not even considering a conservative point of view. I have received some of that same vitriol simply because I am running for the Republican nomination as a conservative. So, it’s just brainwashing and people not being open-minded, pure and simple.

          BLITZER: That’s — that’s a strong word to talk about your fellow African-Americans, brainwashed?

          CAIN: For two-thirds of them, Wolf, that is the case. Now, the good news is, I happen to believe that a third to 50 percent of the black Americans in this country, they are open-minded. I’m meeting them every day. They stop me in the airport. And, so, this whole notion that all black Americans are necessarily going to stay and vote Democrat and vote for Obama, that’s simply not true. More and more black Americans are thinking for themselves and that’s the good thing.

          BLITZER: And you’ve suggested, correct me if I’m wrong, that if you were the Republican nominee you think a third of African-Americans would vote for you?

          CAIN: I do believe a third would vote for me based upon my own anecdotal feedback. Now, they won’t be voting for me because I’m black, they’ll be voting for me because of my policies and because of what I’m offering to fix this economy, starting with, as you know, my 9-9-9 plan. That’s what they’re responding to.

          (Bolded emphasis mine.)

          The entire transcript is here

          • freentn

            vote of 50% of the 98% of Blacks who voted for BO.

            Do you really think that cain can get Blacks to abandon BO and the dem party? If so give me some statistics from past elections for the past 50 years that indicate that cain’s delusions are even remotely possible of coming true.

            Be forewarned that I can present statics showing that W, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and Gov Perry have in fact garnered large percentages of the Hispanic Vote in prior elections.

          • rightwingmom52

            …

  • Scope

    and comments about immigration, you can almost see his transition away from supporting an almost identical position on immigration as Perry, including saying several times that the states should be empowered to take care of the problem that the federal government can’t and won’t do. He specifically said in the Sept. 7 debate that “the people closest to the problem are the best ones to solve the problem.” I would say Gov. Perry is one of the “ones closest to the problem” and has abidded by, and supported the legislatures support of the Texas Dream Act. That is a state taking care of it’s own problem if I ever saw one.

    Now, after Perry has stumbled, Cain seems to be jumping on the Romney bandwagon, whose positions are just as bad, if not worse. Me thinks that Cain knows he will not win the nom, but is willing to jump on whatever bandwagon may just win the opportunity to appoint him to the next admin. Opportunist maybe?

    • porkandcheese

      Cain knows Romney wants Rubio, because Romney said so himself. If Cain can whip up enough base anger over immigration and rekindle the amnesty debate, he makes Rubio less attractive to Romney, who hates confrontation. That is why Cain has been talking about the black vote. He promises Romney he can nullify the issue of racism for him. (Nobody can actually do this.) You know who loves hearing Republicans start demonizing Hispanics? Obama who is losing their support. The stupid party is snatching defeat from the jaws of victory… again.

      • freentn

        is playing the race card on the Republican Party isn’t he?

        I don’t think it will work because the Republicans know that it is a historical fact that Blacks are going to vote for democrats no matter what.

        Hispanics are in play. W showed that Republicans can get the Hispanic vote as has Gov Perry.

        • porkandcheese

          It’s Democrats begging not to be thrown in the briar patch. If they can paint Perry as dumb and corrupt, sure, and they’re trying. But Perry is a likable man, and he knows immigration inside and out. Most on our side don’t even bother.

          • freentn

            of facing Perry and delighted with the prospect of facing romney/cain based on the LSM’s relative treatment of the candidates.

  • izoneguy

    N/T

    • porkandcheese

      I wouldn’t rule it out.

  • izoneguy
    • tyman

      !

  • Darin_H

    Most of his campaign mistakes are now 4 years old, he is polished (even more than Slick Mitt 4 years ago, he comes off as “more authentically polished” if that’s possible).

    Cain seems to do great and then has a big slip up. Three steps up and two steps back. Again.

    • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

      No Cain, no Bachman, etc., etc.

  • anxious4change

    And yet Cain managed to lump them together into one “Perry is soft on immigration” statement.

    Perry is the farthest thing from soft on securing the border and his record in that regard shows it.

    I have always liked Cain, but I cannot tolerate when lies are told by other GOP candidates about their fellow republicans. Michelle Bachmann also lied in the 2nd debate when she said Merck made millions on Perry’s executive order. Really? When the executive order never happened and not a single “innocent 12 year old” got the vaccine? It was an outright lie that was never challenged, but it did not go unnoticed.

    I lost a whole lot of respect for her that night, and I just lost a whole lot of respect for Cain too.

    • freentn

      romney to the list of candidates who have repeatedly LIED about Perry’s positions and record.

    • unclefred

      Not everyone does. I see ridding the country of illegals currently here as much a part of border security as building a fence, putting boots on the ground, etc. Also from my perspective, the instate tuition issue certainly indicates that Perry is out of step with my view on immigrant. I would characterize his position as being soft on illegal immigration compared to others.

      A refusal on my part to separate this into two issues is no more lying about Perry’s position than my unwillingness to separate tax and spending policy.

      • streiff

        and there was no one on the stage who agrees with getting rid of all illegals.

        • anxious4change

          Even Sarah Palin has been quoted as saying you cannot just round up 14 million illegals and deport them. So if that’s the case, then do you help them become taxpaying citizens, or do you just accept you can’t throw them out while letting them live at taxpayer’s expense and hope it all goes away by itself?

          Perry’s actions and positions on securing the border are listed on peskytruth.wordpress.com, much too long to list here. But he’s certainly no slacker when it comes to sealing the border.

          Bottom line, and he’s said it himself — he would not have to deal with almost 2 million illegal immigrants in his state if the Feds responded to his repeated requests for money and other Federal support to seal the border using a combination of urban fences and unmanned air surveillance with boots on the ground (imagine how many unemployed VETERANS could be put to work with his idea!). And building a fence in a river is not practical. No one ever mentions the river, which is much of the 1200 mile border.

          • freentn

            ..

        • unclefred

          all the existing immigration laws to the letter with regard to illegal immigrants what would be the ultimate result for illegals in the nation today?

          Have any of them advocated enforcing existing immigration laws?

          This is a single issue, with several parts, but at it’s base either we protect our nation from those who have yet to enter illegally and those who have already done so, or it’s all just noise. With one obvious exception, regardless about what we do about illegal immigration, we must end the war that is going on along our southern boarder, and protect the rights and property of the citizens who live there.

          • anxious4change

            but the reality is, your view on immigration does not match the view of the majority of Texans. If it did, then the republican legislature would never have passed in-state tution in the first place.

            Immigration is not an all-or-nothing issue, which is what you want it to be. Even the Catholic Church supports the Federal Dream Act, and yet you’ll find many a conservative in the Catholic Church. You have a hard stance on immigration. There are many more people “somewhere in the middle” who don’t.

            My feeling is if Perry can win the nomination despite the in-state tuition, it will actually be a very favorable position for him in the general election. Hard on border security, humane on dealing with the ones who are here.

            No one liked the guys who screamed out “let them die” when Ron Paul was asked the insurance question, right? Deporting 20 million illegals would sound about the same to the majority of Americans, in my opinion anyway.

          • westcoastpatriette

            twenty million illegals last time I checked. Enforcing the laws on the books will cause them to self-deport. Now that’s a novel idea. Poor babies. Think they can’t find their way home?

            Just because the Texas legislature passed the TDA in 2001 does not mean the majority of Texans favor the law. Last I heard, Texans are with the majority of Americans who are not in favor of Dream Acts of any kind–including Texas’s bill.

          • anxious4change

            by their parents, who know nothing about Mexico, would find their way “home” since Mexico was never their home. You mean those poor babies?

          • streiff

            and by majority of the Tx legislature you realize it passed unanimously in the senate and 130-4 in the house.

          • ru4fred

            that has to stop. You sound angry, angry, angry. Everyone supports stronger border enforcement, but we have millions of illegals here in Texas who have lived most of their lives in Texas. These people need to be treated humanely (paraphrasing Reagan). Anyone who wants a job in Texas can find a job. The problem with the other states that are governed by Obama types or Obama-lite (Republican) types, is the oppressive state and federal regulations and taxes. Perry can help create the environment that will allow everyone to prosper. We can be a wealthy nation again. Illegals are not the problem. The problem is lack of economic growth (i.e. job creation).

  • freentn

    1) DEMAND a chair so that Perry is not standing on stage in pain for 2 hours. McCain and BO had chairs in the debate in Nashville in 2008. Bush and Gore had chairs in 2000. Why let the MSM force Perry to endure torturous back pain for 2 hours.

    2) Be up front about the obvious back pain that causes Perry to lose his train of thought.

    3) Take Erick E. up on his offer to stage an intelligent discussion of the issues. This romney soundbite gotcha silliness is boring.

    • CincoSolas_del_Bronx

      Having been stymied in your attempt to convince Perry-mullers that his real followers abhor dictionaries, you now want to us know that he has hand-picked a coterie of dimwits. Breathlessly anticipating Phase 3.

      • CincoSolas_del_Bronx

        .

  • ribeye

    People get all bent out of shape when candidates in the primaries when “their guy” gets the slightest attack. The reason why so many candidates like Cain are focusing their fire on Perry is :
    A) The need to win Iowa to continue, and Perry needs a win there
    B) Perry is the front runner and draws Tea Party/Grassroots Base support
    C) Perry has given them some ripe targets on an emotional issue that infuriates the base

    I saw Cain’s clip, and his goal right now is to take down Perry and not divert his attention on other candidates. Romney is not in his way, so he’s ignored (but Cain has attacked him several times before, so it’s not like he’s in cahoots) My impression of Cain’s statement was”Today, I can’t support Perry” meaning, the primary (that’s why he said today) and he then used it as a segway to attack Perry. I have zero doubt Cain will support the eventual GOP nominee (but I do agree that he needs to clarify for the sake of candidacy)

    Even Biden was on record saying Obama was unqualified to be President, and he was made Vice President. Candidates get to make attacks, and it’s up to GOP voters to determine what’s fair play. This is how primaries go, and so far, with the exception of Bachmann, I haven’t seen anything too out of bounds.

    • richp89

      100% agree. Let’s pick the best and go after Obama!!!

  • draggingtree

    That?s a very serious and foolishness statement coming from one who is running for the nomination of the Republican Party. Cain needs to rethink what he said or just pick up his bags and go home.

    • tyman

      I not only listened to the answer, but I replayed the question.

      Blitzer made it clear: “…if he were the nominee”. Even I could understand that: after the debates, after the primaries, after the conventions: if Rick Perry were the nominee.

      Great, support Obama and be a sore loser. If he’s going to be that emotional about it if he loses, we don’t need someone guided by that kind of emotion to be in the Oval Office.

  • runner12

    is very disapointing. Cain surged because he stayed off of the bashing of other candidates. There are many other ways he could have answered this question. His tacit endorsment of Romney is equally disturbing. He needs to realize that his grassroots support is strong because they view him as the anti-Romney. Maybe that moniker has been misapplied.

    Not a good move by Cain.

    • Aaron Gardner

      it would be hard to consider him the anti-Romney.

      • runner12

        I have to admit, as someone who identifies with the Tea Party movement I like what Cain has to say. However, his endorsement of Romney and attacks on Perry seem more establishment than Tea Party.

        Now I know that “establishment” is a loaded word with multiple meanings. Nonetheless, there does exist a Rockefeller-type wing of the GOP who is not favorable to conservatives. These are the same people who despised Reagan when he ran for office. Most of the people in this group are either pushing for Romney or Christie to win the nomination.

        Cain’s support of Romney in 2008 is forgiveable given who we had in the field at the time. But why now when we have more alternatives? I am just puzzled by Cain’s comments. He definitely needs more vetting.

        • runner12

          That would be “forgivable”.

        • perry4prez

          I think that the Rockefeller Republican types who are pushing Governor Christie to run realize in their hearts that Romney can’t win so they want to take the religion issue off the table. And it is true that I would have not problem voting for Chris Christie, he is particularly strong on helping small businesses and is against Unions. I am all for Christie running because that would siphon votes away from Romney and leave Perry as the nominee, no question about it.

  • http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

    Does Cain really mean to imply that he would not endorse Perry against Obama?

    Is it Cain, Romney, or else?

    I thought Cain was something different. Now I am forced to ask myself if he is willing to burn down the party if he or his chosen second is not the nominee.

    • Common_Cents

      I can’t believe people are reading into this.

      Why would Cain give kudos to another candidate that he probably feels is the front runner?

      This whole discussion is baseless and stupid.

      Cain is stupid for falling into this stupid divisive line of questioning and people are stupid for getting all huffed up about it and disecting it in to minutia.

      When are the other candidates going to realize most of the media is actually hostile and looking to create wedges. The only one that gets it is Gingrich. If others don’t wake up, they just might get steam rolled in the general no matter who they are.

      • rightwingmom52

        I guess anyone who has a favored candidate these days is a “bot” or “traitor” or not entitled to an opinion if it isn’t the other person’s favored candidate. So if I happen to like Cain “today” and maybe even tomorrow instead of [fill in the blank], that somehow jumps to supporting Obama.

        Let’s suppose Perry said, “Today, I could not support Herman Cain as the nominee because I do not agree with his 999 plan. I think it’s adding another tax, and I’m not in favor of a national sales tax. So, that’s where I think he and I have a basic fundamental difference of opinion.” Would that mean Perry would not support Cain if he were the nominee? That he would support Obama? I don’t think so.

        • anxious4change

          should ever say they wouldn’t support one of the others if nominated. EVER. Because in the end, ONE will be nominated, and the Obama campaign will use it against our guy, saying things like “even other republicans can’t support you” as they play the tape of Cain or whoever saying he can’t support our candidate if nominated. It’ll become a 15 second spot in a nationally aired ad.

          I think it’s really fine if these candidates disagree with each other on certain issues. They are not carbon copies of each other, and no two people agree 100% on everythingm just as no two states are alike. No need to throw the baby out with the bathwater though. Why go so far as to say you wouldn’t support or endorse him if nominated? How about “I do not agree with his 999 plan….” and just skip the first part of that sentence all together.

          • runner12

            No matter how one wants to spin this, it was not a good statement by Cain. Which is disapointing.

      • http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

        He may not have meant it that way but the MSM is setting the narrative. He was foolish to say it in the first place. He will be doubly foolish to let the MSM continue elevate the claim to the level they already have. He must speak out or he lets them speak for him.

  • JSobieski

    People mad at Perry for the in-state tuition issue nonetheless consider Rubio to be their perfect VP candidate even though Rubio agrees with Perry. http://nationaljournal.com/politics/perry-s-not-the-only-gop-star-to-support-tuition-breaks-for-illegal-immigrants-kids-20110927.

    People defending Perry for the instate tuition issue were on average far less forgiving in 2008 when the state was Arkansas instead of Texas and the candidate was Huckabee instead of Perry.

    How many Cain supporters put Paul Ryan into the “establishment GOP” category due to Ryan’s TARP vote even though Cain himself supported TARP and Cain is supposed to be the anti-establishment candidate as a non-politician?

    We chastise people on RS who don’t commit to supporting the Republican Nominee, and then an early RS favorite (Cain) declares that he couldn’t support one prominent candidate if he becomes the nominee.

    All of these contradictions result when people draw a lot of absolutist lines in the sand that they either end up backing away from or doing something stupid (like not voting or voting third party).

    I would humbly suggest that people use more measured language in primaries. In this sense, Cain is providing a valuable example.

    The point is not to refrain from drawing any lines in the sand and behave as spineless weasles. The point is to pick the most important lines and stick to them. Kind of like conservative philosophy when it comes to laws—have fewer laws, make them easier to understand, and enforce them.

    Otherwise, we just give the libs more ammunition for November 2012. None of our candidates is a savior. All of our candidates are better than Obama.

    • CincoSolas_del_Bronx

      and I can’t be the sole non-wonk who actually reads the site to have my preferences informed and sees unprovoked knife-fights wearing thin over the coming many, many, many weeks.

      • JSobieski

        The knife fights are perplexing but there is always going to be an emotional component in politics. I used to think that emotion driven politics was primarily of the left, but 2008 finally convinced me otherwise and 2010 served as an exclamation point.

        I think that conservatives are so used to emotionally locking in with conservatives being attacked by non-conservatives that whe don’t behave differently in inter-party fights.

    • runner12

      some truth in what you are saying Jsob. On the other hand, I think that some of the inconsistencies exist because we often fail to discuss the positive aspects of the candidates we like that make us willing to overlook their flaws.

      For example, many who went after Huckabee (and this is just a guess as I was not at RS at the time) for the same thing Perry did probably did not like some of the other big government things Huck did. On the flip side, Perry may have some strong positives that make people willing to overlook the TX tuition issue. The climate in the country with Obama in office now is also different as well than it was then. But many people fail to make these points, thus inconsistencies abound.

      The reality is that there are people who are truly inconsistent and those who just fail to argue their positions well. But I completely agree with your last line about none of the candudates being perfect. People need to remember that anyone of our candidates would be better than Obama. Good grief, the man is a neo-socialist!

      • porkandcheese

        Texas has no income tax, and the tuition funds are coming from property and sales tax and oil revenue, if I’m not mistaken. Illegals are paying into the system.

        • JSobieski

          However the point in my comment was not to debate the particular issue, but rather to suggest the origins of candidate contradictions are often found is us, the voters.

  • Common_Cents

    It was a dumb gotcha question at the debate. Cain prob felt he had to back up his answer during the CNN interview.

    This is getting way to nitpicky and reading into things.

    Why the hell should Cain or any other candidate acknowledge their own competition? Sheesh, would you expect the MN vikings say great things about the Packers during a close division race?

    The candidates need to quit falling for this stupid stupid divisive BS by the media. Gingrich is the only one calling them out.

    For anyone to give this topic discussion and reading into it is a total waste of time.

    • streiff

      it wasn’t a gotcha it was volunteered.

      Romney has said he will support the nominee, why can’t Cain? I he a smaller man than Romney?

      You don’t have to discuss this.

      • Jim Tomasik

        but I bet Newt would not have fallen for it.

      • Common_Cents

        and now feels he has to stick with it in order not to get the flip flop label.

        Do you really think that Cain wouldn’t support the eventual nominee no matter who it is?

        It’s a silly topic for him to discuss or anyone else to discuss during a heated race. Period. Does anyone think you are going to get some honest answer? Why would one candidate give a competing candidate some kudos at this point? They are all trying to differentiate from the pack, so who the hell would want to admit any endorsements right now when they are trying to compete?

        Why would anyone say anything that implies, “golly gee, I think XXX is a better candidate.”

        The rest of the candidates need to learn from Gingrich to call out the hostile media and dumb questions to avoid the divisive traps set.

        • streiff

          on what he’d do. I see no reason to doubt the man is telling the truth.

          Again Romney had no problem saying he’d support the eventual nominee. How hard would it be to do that? Or to say you can’t support either Romney or Perry because of decisions they’ve made.

    • JSobieski

      Right?

    • JSobieski

      you are defining a whole lot of questions as “gotcha” questions.

      Don’t presidents get asked questions about supporting this, supporting that, etc. all the time?

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

        a taxpayer subsidy. It is not a benefit to pay the base tuition. It is not discounted. Rather, the out-of-state tuition is added to. They still have to pay tuition and it is not subsidized.

  • http://livingwiththewoof.wordpress.com turtlemom

    I like Herman Cain. He is not “Republican” nor “Democrat,” he is, rather, a Conservative with his own style. He wants to return us to an era of very small government, reduced taxes and individual responsibility. All the people I know prefer Herman Cain over all the other GOP candidates. Our country could do a whole lot worse than by electing Herman Cain. He has solid old-fashioned American values and he keeps to them – no compromises.
    Cheerio!
    Turtlemom

    • streiff

      in a “Republican” primary competing for the “Republican” nomination for president.

      How does support for “very small government” comport with his vocal support of TARP?

  • http://realpolitik-kaiser.blogspot.com/ Patrick

    What’s he supposed to say? There’s no need to endorse your main competitor in a competition. Does Cain have to worry about competing for Romney voters? I haven’t seen any evidence that Cain and Romney are vying the same base.

    As a personal judgment on Cain, based on what I’ve seen and heard of Cain, I doubt that’s what he intended. Quarrel with that if you will, but I do not see this statement as a cause for alarm.

    • streiff

      what did he say?

      • http://realpolitik-kaiser.blogspot.com/ Patrick

        have to worry about for saying that he’ll support the eventual nominee? That his voters will switch over to Cain or Perry during the primary?

  • republitarian

    I remember back when Cain was asked if he supports auditing the Fed, he said that he is not opposed to it but it is not a cause is going to champion.

    When I hear him say that he would not support candidate X, I don’t assume he means that he would rather vote for Obama. All I think he is saying is that he is the champion for his own cause and if he is not nominated he is not going to turn around and sign up for the cheerleading squad for his opponent’s team. I don’t think that makes him a bad sportsman.

    Cain doesn’t seek to ingratiate himself with the political class because he has a real job to go back to when his campaign is over. If he says that he’ll sit out the election and not vote, then OK blast away, but I’m willing to cut him some slack for now until I hear more.

  • waitaminute

    No matter how many times it’s repeated, this is anything but a two-man race. Remember that in October 2007, the top two candidates were Giuliani and Thompson. (Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/10/18/opinion/polls/main3383010.shtml)

    The fact is, it’s far too early to call this race one way or the other, and anyone who says otherwise is just talking out of their, well, you know.

    • Aaron Gardner

      So, no, it isn’t really “far too early”.

      • mort

        that the delegates from those states that start so early are allowed to cast their ballot at the convention for whoever they determine can win the presidency? Instead of voting for candidates who on the ballot in January and out of the race in August.
        Remember – be judicious when you cast your votes for delegates – they will do the nominating.

        • carolina

          There are likely to be a whole lot of ‘free agents’ working deals before the convention is over. That makes Romney (the establishment) even ‘scarier’ to me. – groan -

        • carolina

          There are likely to be a whole lot of ‘free agents’ working deals before the convention is over. That makes Romney (the establishment) even ‘scarier’ to me. – groan -

          • mort

            someone understands that. All those that contest what I say, think their state’s delegates are bound to vote for whoever wins the popular vote in that state. This is not true in Pennsylvania. It might be true in some states, but none of my challengers identifies their state and checks with the party bosses to find out the truth.

  • traversecityconservative

    Herman doesn’t have to pick Perry or Romney. Just because you and other ignorants think it’s a two person race doesn’t make it so. I agree with Herman. I won’t “SUPPORT” Perry as the nominee either. Will I vote for him? Yes. Will I go door to door for him, give him money or have his yard sign on my property? NO, NO, and NO. The economy, illegal immigration and a strong national defense are my top priorities. Any one of them can sink us as a country. Perry has it all wrong on the illegal alien problem and he tops it off by telling US that WE are heartless? No thanks.

    • porkandcheese

      What can he do with a population he can neither detain nor deport? The Texas Dream Act was a state solution, not a national model. Romneycare was meant to be a national plan; now it is, and Romney will not repeal it or address entitlement reform of any kind. This is by his own admission. I can guarantee you he won’t round up and deport illegals, either. His rhetoric would change during a general election, if he were the nominee, and he would pander to Hispanics worse than you say Perry does. This is a two-man race, because Cain just endorsed Romney.

      • traversecityconservative

        for the most part. Romney voters, however, are different than Cain voters. Of course he’s not going to buddy up with Perry because he’s trying to get his voters.

  • GregInFla

    I guess I missed the whole convention thing and the primaries. Why would Cain endorse Perry when Cain is still running and Perry is not the nominee? I won’t endorse anyone “today” either.

  • harryvarden

    We have our differences and Rick Perry is not the one I’m behind, but if he wins, hw has my vote in November 2012.

  • Michael Dugas

    by asking such a loaded “gotcha” question. They asked it hoping to catch him and hoping to cause divisiveness within the party. And all this “bot” and “traitor” talk serves only one purpose and that is NOT to bring us together.
    Cain is a political novice. He got caught by the left wing media in a trick…and quite a few of you are aiding and abetting the MSM with their propaganda war with the GOP by tearing at each other over this.
    When we had the Presidency and both Houses of Congress we got very little of what we wanted done because once the GOP had control they fractured into cliques and all went to war for their own pet interests and forgot to work together, at the very least, on what they mutually agreed upon. We, as a party, have a horrible habit of eating our own. That has to stop. We can disagree with each other but we have to stop tearing at each other and making every issue a hill to die on.

    • gekster

      Again I will equate this to a ball team.
      When the team you are rooting for wins and does great, it’s yea, yea.
      But let them lose a couple of games, and it’s jump ship time.
      If you let one gaff or flub from your candidate causes you to give up on them,
      (bad choice of words or a poor debate performance)
      you never really supported them in the first place.

    • porkandcheese

      He should get out of the kitchen. I bet you the former head of the Restaurant Workers Union and Burger King has hired more than a few illegals in his day. Who is the magnet now? Hypoocrite. Another loon bites the dust.

      • Michael Dugas

        If you are then I think you should read it again. I wasn’t endorsing anyone. I was talking about an entirely different subject than is Cain able to stand in your proverbial kitchen.
        What I find very humorous though, other than someone with the moniker “porkandcheese” talking Burger King smack, is that even though your reply
        is totally off mark….it totally represents and reflects what I was talking about IN the post.

        • porkandcheese

          But you were awfully quick to make excuses for Cain. This is the big leagues, and everything you say will be dissected, repeated and nuanced.