Pain With Cain

Herman Cain met with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and made some news.  Apparently, the topic of Libya is a trick question; Cain also went to Wisconsin without getting up to speed on the matter of strikes, collective bargaining, and public sector unions.

This is too much charm and authenticity for some of us.

Comments

[henry]

The Packer game included that pause in each commercial break as ABC tried to get viewers for it's local news.

Today we get the nutjobs descending on Walker's house (not the Gov's Mansion) to chant and collect signatures.

If you want to know where your local OWS idiots went after camp shutdowns -- they sent the paid ones here.

[peter]

Maybe I'm wrong, but I read this as an endorsement by Sowell of either Newt Gingrich or Rick Perry.LUN

[Clarice]

I think Cain deserves to be defended agains what still appears to me to be anonymous and or thin attacks of harassment but the interview yesterday was terrible and inexcusable.

[bolitha]

You are right, Clarice. It all makes me very sad for Cain.

[qrstuv]

Ouch. If he doesn't yet know that it's important to do some homework, when would he learn that?

Ouch again.

[jimmyk]

I'm not sure, Peter. After suggesting that Romney is another Dole/McCain, the key sentence is this:

The question now is whether the conservative Republican candidates who have enjoyed their successive and short-lived boomlets — Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry and Herman Cain — are prepared to stay in the primary race to the bitter end, or whether their conservative principles will move them to withdraw and throw their support to another conservative candidate.

Does he mean that two should bow out and support the third, or that all three should bow out and support an unnamed other?

[Jim Ryan]

Santorum?

[Appalled]

The time for solidarity with Cain, or making any effort to explain his campaign, is over and done. He does not know or care to know what he is doing, what he is thinking, or how his ignorance looks to people who can look beyond the fact that he is NOT the dread Romney monster.

Funny thing -- I was listening to Mark Levin (who was only about an eight, as opposed to the usual eleven on the scream-o-meter) a couple of nights ago while cleaning the kitchen. He was crowing about the results of his Presidential poll on the website, which was cming out at 55% Gingrich, 41% Cain and only 4% Romney. And then out came some more standard issue Romney bashing.

And then the mystery of the persistence of the "not-Romney" candidate was revealed. The parts of the Conservative base who live in a talk radio cocoon (as opposed to an NPR cocoon or an NYT cocoon, or a mainstram media cocoon) have become so violently opposed to Romney, because he makes such a fine target for the talk radio hosts, that it is unimaginable to vote for him.

I really wonder if the talk radio hosts, by encouraging this dynmaic, have done their cause any favors.

[Appalled]

Jim Ryan:

Santorum is a good, o' fashioned circa 2006 christian conservative. I don't think the Tea Party emphasis on cutting spending deeply resonates with him, as much as the idea that the Federal government should use its powers to put an end to gay Marriage and abortion.

I think Santorum is a serious guy, and not a surface flash sort like Cain or Gingrich. But I think his politics and his empahasis make a lot of independents want to scream.

[Pofarmer]

"or whether their conservative principles will move them to withdraw and throw their support to another conservative candidate."

How does that work, exactly? What conservative principals lead one to quit?

"I really wonder if the talk radio hosts, by encouraging this dynmaic, have done their cause any favors. "

What percentage of Americans even listen to talk radio? What percentage are primary voters?

[Pofarmer]

"Finally, Cain said: "I would have done a better job of determining who the opposition is. And I'm sure that our intelligence people had some of that information. Based upon who made up that opposition . . . might have caused me to make some different decisions about how we participated. Secondly, no I did not agree with (Moammar) Gadhafi killing his citizens. Absolutely not. . . . I would have supported many of the things that they did to help stop that."

Cain said the question of America's involvement in Libya was not a simple yes or no question. "I would have gone about assessing the situation differently. It might have caused us to end up in the same place."

Told that a number of Republican leaders had praised Obama for his handling of the situation, Cain said he wasn't criticizing the president, "I just don't think enough was done relative to assessing the opposition before everything exploded.""

How is this stumbling badly? Sounds exactly right, to me.

[MarkO]

I hope to be wrong, but I'm waiting for more and more shoes to fall on and around Cain.

[Dave (in MA)]

Po, it has to be seen or heard. A cleaned-up transcript doesn't convey how out of his league he is. IMO ABO still applies, but Cain clearly isn't prepared.

[Pofarmer]

I dunno, I've heard Obama answer some questions in less than stellar fashion. Suppose I'm willing to cut some slack when asked complex policy questions with no clear answers.

[Porchlight]

Love Cain, but he ain't gonna make it.

I guess I'm leaning toward Newt now, barring a credible comeback by Perry.

[Captain Hate]

I guess I'm leaning toward Newt now, barring a credible comeback by Perry.

That's where I am.

[Appalled]

Newt?

Better hope he does not have to negotiate with Democrats. When he was speaker, Clinton took him to the cleaners, and then made him the great American bogeyman.

There is no doubt that Newt has been running a less idiotic campaign than the other non-Romneys. But that is an exceptionally low bar, and disregards fact that Newt has baggage that a dyas worth of Smsonite could not contain.

[narciso]

It wasn't that bad, because there was clearly no rhyme or reason behind the Libyan operation, as Niall pointed out to the folks
on Morning Joke. but it didn't have good optics,

[Danube of Thought]

I wish Cain would withdraw as gracefully as possible. He is not up to the job.

[glasater]

I like Newt a lot also. But I don't think he'll be able to raise campaign funds like Mitt will do. And it's going to take a bunch of money and tremendous organization to overcome Obama.

[Benjamin Franklin]

" But that is an exceptionally low bar, and disregards fact that Newt has baggage that a dyas worth of Smsonite could not contain."

Maybe Appalled, but he does have that soundbyte thingy down pretty well. What else do you need to win if you are the Sultan of Snark?
The money will flow when other avenues disappear.

[Old Lurker]

Sad but true...you guys are right that he is done. I don't see Perry getting back up either.

[Threadkiller]

I am sliding towards DoT's opinion. I still believe that the person Cain backs will win the primary and the Presidency.

[Benjamin Franklin]

Hope and Change....it's still alive....generic Republican.......NEXT !!!!!

"Against a generic, unnamed Republican challenger, Obama tied 43 to 43"

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/68269.html#ixzz1dnM4wKYc

[Benjamin Franklin]

'Sliding' is an unfortunate choice of words.

[Porchlight]

Congrats, Appalled, you got the requisite overused "took him to the cleaners" and "baggage" into the same comment.

We're not talking about ideal candidates here, obviously. Last man standing against Romney gets my vote. Romney gets my vote if he's the last man standing against Obama.

It's pretty straightforward.

[Appalled]

Porchlight:

Hey, I'm sure if I tried, I could get even more cliches into a comment. In fact, I've probably done it. But it does seem appropriate for Gingrich who is, alas, something of a retread...er, Nostalgia Candidate.

There is a point where your position (anybody but Romney until it's anybody but Obama) becomes straightforard but absurd. Cain and Perry and Gingrich, thorugh their actions and gaffes over the years, do not seem able to do the work of the Presidency, either through lack of experience and willingness to dispose of ignornace (Cain), lack of ability to prepare and sell the product (Perry), or simple lack of discipline (Gingrich).

[Porchlight]

There is a point where your position (anybody but Romney until it's anybody but Obama) becomes straightforard but absurd.

I have not been shy in pointing out the weaknesses of Cain, Perry, et al.

I don't think it's proven that Gingrich isn't "able to do the work of the Presidency." I agree discipline has been an issue in the past, but should he win, his inaugruation will occur nearly twenty years after his battles with Clinton as Speaker began. People mature and learn over the years.

I don't get to choose who's running. Newt is at the moment the best of the non-Romney candidates, and I don't want Romney and I *really* don't want Obama. Newt can and does challenge the media, which Romney does not, and he can kick Obama's ass up and down the stage in a debate, which Romney cannot. So go ahead and characterize that as absurd if you like.

[Barbara-Lurking]

Porchlight, As much as I like Cain, I, too, am coming to the conclusion that he is not the right man for the job.

Gingrich has a deeper understanding of the issues the country faces and seems willing to confront them.

Romney strikes me as bland and/or lukewarm, neither of which is especially appealing unless you're starving.

[jimmyk]

My recollection of the Newt-Clinton battle is not so much that Clinton "took him to the cleaners," but that this was an early example of the MSM successfully taking sides and making the Republicans the villains in a symmetric battle. I would hope that Republicans in general, and Newt in particular, are more on guard for this than they were in the 90s. In any case, that was a legislative battle, not a political campaign, so the precedent isn't as meaningful.

Also, the MSM hasn't been as successful lately--they tried to make the Republicans the bad guys in the debt battle, but it didn't really work. Now Obama is flailing around against the debt committee, but I don't see the public really buying it, despite all the soft words like "compromise."

[JM Hanes]

It may be twenty years later, Porchlight, but I'm not sure why Newt gets an almost total pass for all of his much more recent flip flops when nobody is willing to cut Romney an inch of slack. Just because he's never had the power to follow through on any of his positions, doesn't make the tin foil hat advertisement he made with Nancy Pelosi insignificant. He dismissed Paul Ryan's plan outright before he was for it. He's jumped on more bandwagons ex post facto than I can count. The list goes on and on if anyone cares to look at it. He's a fantastic candidate, but I don't think the hubris which made him such a disaster as Speaker has noticeably waned. I'm certainly giving him a second look, but I tend to think that either Romney or Perry would be a more effective President.

Just sayin'

[Benjamin Franklin]

"I'm certainly giving him a second look, but I tend to think that either Romney or Perry would be a more effective President."

or.....my cocker spaniel.

[boris]

Walk vs talk favors Newt IMO. Welfare reform, Surplus, Contract with America.

Also Romneycare takes a big issue down several notches in effectiveness. Perry and Newt have much better credentials wrt entitlements.

[Captain Hate]

I'm not sure why Newt gets an almost total pass for all of his much more recent flip flops when nobody is willing to cut Romney an inch of slack.

I'm pretty sure we all heaped on Newt when he took the extremely ill advised shots at Paul Ryan. I said at the time that Newt does schizzy unprovoked things that make him a disaster as a pol with a large amount of clout. It's only because of these endless debates, which are his forte (plus imo he's been chastened somewhat by the piling on following the Ryan jab), that he's looking so good. Perry has done very poorly in them and Mitt hasn't really hurt himself. And I'm prepared to accept my latter day overlord.

[centralcal]

I still like Perry best. Next is Newt. Last is Romney.

Fox News seems to think Sarah Palin will endorse a candidate tonight when she appears on Greta. Don't know how accurate that is, seems kind of early for her to endorse. Anybody have any guesses which one she might select?

[Porchlight]

He's a fantastic candidate, but I don't think the hubris which made him such a disaster as Speaker has noticeably waned.

I don't think he's a fantastic candidate at all. I think he's pretty close to a terrible candidate at times. He just happens to have certain rhetorical skills much needed at the moment, and to be the only one left standing against Romney.

[Porchlight]

What Cap'n said. We are on the same page as usual.

[Jane]

As always I went to the wrong thread. Hello from San Juan!

[Captain Hate]

JANE!!!

[jimmyk]

I don't know--either the debates are definitive or not. If they are, then Newt is preferable to Perry. If they aren't then vice-versa. But if we say Newt is only doing well because of the (meaningless) debates, but Perry is doing badly in the debates, so he is out, where does that leave us? Once again with the compromise milquetoast least-offensive choice?

[centralcal]

Hi Jane! (Hi Caro, too!) What's news on the cruise?

[Porchlight]

Interesting, centralcal. I'd be surprised if Palin endorsed at this time, but if she does, I guess I'd say it'd be Newt. Because of course she always agrees with me. ;)

[Porchlight]

Hi Jane and Caro! Hope you're having fun and great weather.

[Porchlight]

jimmyk,

The debates unfortunately have a great deal of influence - much more than they should. Bachmann and Cain began their rise and fall based on debate performances. Perry tanked because of a debate. Newt is rising because of his debate performances. He will need to be a strong debater to have any chance of pulling off a win.

I wish it weren't that way, but there you have it.

[narciso]

Pod the Younger, blames the debates for this predicament, which is true, in so far as the candidates have put themselves in the bullseye.

Remember when it was automatically assumed she would endorse Perry, Newt has done better
than the others, but that's because of the sliding scale,

[Jane]

News: John Fund guarantees that Obamacare is going down, and SE Cupp and I grew up in the same town 27 years apart.

[Jane]

Oh, and everyone is worried about the 45 % floor for Obama.

[Captain Hate]

Jane is SE Cupp teh hawt in real life?

[Jane]

She is Capn, - if I understand you correctly.

[Captain Hate]

I'm sure you understand very well.

[JM Hanes]

I'd be surprised if Palin weighed in with an endorsement at this point. If she does, though, I'd like to see her give Perry a much needed boost. Has governing energy rich states given them a little something extra in common? IIRC, there's no love lost between Palin & Romney (for which Romney is to blame), but she's endorsed centrist candidates before.

I'm sorry Pawlenty decided to drop out so early, instead of trying to rework his approach and up his game, even though he was getting on my nerves. It's not like anybody else hasn't been disappointing in some way. Maybe he just didn't want it enough to get elected. I sometimes wonder if that's actually a better quality in a President than being willing to claw your way into the White House, alas.

[Old Lurker]

JimmyK: "Now Obama is flailing around against the debt committee, but I don't see the public really buying it, despite all the soft words like "compromise."

Speaking of that, isn't that about to explode? If the deal they cut to kick this can (the debt ceiling extension) down the road was automatic drastic cuts to sacred cows on both sides, and assuming the MSM blames us for not fixing the problem with new taxes, I worry the Rs traded a sure win on the debt ceiling for a potential pre Christmas crisis all over again. Having Boehner float balloons about some tax increases last week seems to play right into the script.

Did I hear Hannity right yesterday when he was interviewing the author of "Throw Them All Out" that congress-critters are exempt from insider trading prohibitions that jail the rest of us...but they can trade on their inside knowledge of what is in pending bills with impunity?

I HATE these people. All of them

[centralcal]

Just to clarify about Palin - Greta mentions on her blog only that Palin will be a guest tonight. Says nothing about a candidate endorsement.

Some FNC tweet that blogs have picked up, (perhaps from a promo office?), says to tune in and that Palin will endorse.

Not sure that is gonna happen tonight, but it is fun to speculate WHO she might endorse. I was sort of hoping it would be Perry, too, JMH.

[Captain Hate]

I sometimes wonder if that's actually a better quality in a President than being willing to claw your way into the White House, alas.

This times a gazillion. I've always stated that I would probably hate being around anybody with such an overpowering ego as to think they're uniquely qualified to be the Prez. I think Bush did a good job of being a seemingly "regular guy" contrasted to the stuffed shirt likes of cabana-boy Lurch and Little Lord Fauntlegore. It was probably an affectation; but if can work on a cynic like me.....

[Porchlight]

JMH, I initially thought Palin would endorse Perry for the reason you mention (govs of energy states), but I wonder if she'd go out on a limb for him at this point, especially with the crony capitalism argument being so prominent these days, thanks in part to her. It's a weakness of Perry's that the media will be sure to exploit.

Interesting article on Palin today from Scott Conroy at RCP:

Palin's "Crony Capitalism" Mantra Gets 60 Minutes Boost

Discusses Throw Them All Out, referenced by OL just above.

[Porchlight]

I don't think it was an affectation, Cap'n.

[Dave (in MA)]

Hi Jane, it's 70° here today.

[Captain Hate]

Porch it seemed genuine to me bwtfdik. I never regretted voting for him even if he wasn't conservative enough for my liking.

[narciso]

Ditto, Captain, while I would probably have had a skin crawling moment if I had voted for this fellow;
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204190704577024160426640058.html

[Rick Ballard]

"I worry the Rs traded a sure win on the debt ceiling for a potential pre Christmas crisis all over again. Having Boehner float balloons about some tax increases last week seems to play right into the script."

OL,

The proposals I've seen involve elimination of deductions in exchange for lower top rates (Reaganesque). It's scored as a long term net increase but Obamacare was scored as a saving - there is no long term. I believe the intent to be to force the mandatory cuts through 'failure' of the Stupor Committee.

I don't have a problem with that because a real budget can be passed by March or April '13 - plenty of time left at that point to straighten out the mess in the '13 budget.

[narciso]

Foolish, Cain, Imagine if he had let this come about, on second thought, never mind;

http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?ID=245559&R=R1

[JM Hanes]

Porchlight:

Good for Palin! I'm not sure why, "Schweizer makes the case that whoever wins the Republican nomination would be wise not to turn the issue into a partisan one." I think now is the time for Republicans to be taking ownership of the crony capitalism issue. It's always been way to easy for Democrats to lay that one off on the right, and it looks to me like the current gangsta government is ripe for the picking. I do think Republicans have been a too quick write off the Occupy protests, instead of seizing the opportunity to peal off a lot of the folks who clearly sympathize with the protesters ambient "anger" at the system.

Unfortunately for Mitt, crony capitalism one of the two big issues that he is most poorly positioned to pursue, regardless of what he actually did or didn't do at Bain. Although the universe of potential Vice Presidential picks is pretty large for any nomiee, I could see Newt, who can make that case, playing VP to Romney very effectively. You'd get Romney's executive experience, with a knockout public spokesman promoting White House policy (and pushing conservative policy with the Prez?) and liasing with Congress, where I'm sure he still knows which buttons to press.

[Porchlight]

JMH, I see a Romney/Gingrich ticket as a very real possibility.

I think Palin could have made a decent shot at peeling off the OWSers. But they despise her so deeply I wonder if it would have worked. Maybe some of the Fuddle would have been moved. We are heading toward a big showdown on this issue one way or another and I agree, Romney is not well-positioned.

[jimmyk]

The debates unfortunately have a great deal of influence - much more than they should.

My point was, how much should the debates influence us? It's the same as the old "electability" bugaboo. I'd rather decide which candidate I prefer (and wish everyone else would too), and then I'll do ABO in the general election. We seem to be falling prey to the same thing on debate performance--eliminating Perry and gravitating toward Newt--just because it seems to affect electability.

Having said all that, I think the debates do provide some information, but if they've pushed me higher on Newt and lower on Perry, it's because of that, not because of their debating skills per se.

[Porchlight]

My point was, how much should the debates influence us?

I don't know. At this point it looks like we have no choice - it's all being decided for us whether we like it or not.

My problems with the candidates are not really debate-related, but they lead me to more or less the same place. Newt is erratic and not likely to be an effective executive, Perry is mulish and seemingly unintuitive about matters outside Texas, Cain is beyond help sadly, and who's left besides Romney?

But again, I'd like to see a Perry resurgence. Just don't know what it would take at this point. His heart doesn't seem in it.

[centralcal]

His heart doesn't seem in it.

Porch, I think that is a little unfair. After the humiliation of the 53 second brain freeze, he could have excused himself and waltzed off back to Texas. Instead, he seems to have taken it in good humor and decided to continue on. I think that shows some "heart in it" attitude. Also, whether you like them all or not, he came out today with some very bold proposals which is making news in certain quarters.

[Porchlight]

True, centralcal. It does show guts to keep going.

[Ignatz]

--I think Palin could have made a decent shot at peeling off the OWSers. But they despise her so deeply I wonder if it would have worked.--

Huh?
Barry isn't far enough left for the OWS marxists. These are not fence straddling moderates banging their drums and waiting for the right piper to lead them to the promised land. They've already got a piper and his first name is Karl not Sarah.

[Sara (Pal2Pal)]

I also think Cain's candidacy has come to its end, although in his defense for yesterday, they did say that he was operating on two hours sleep.

JMH: A Romney/Newt pair up would be an incredible thing to watch for 4 or 8 years. Mitt with his analytical and solution-based skills and Newt's skill at handling the media and Congress. Whew! The brain power in the White House, especially compared to what we have now, would blow the walls out of that old building.

[Ignatz]

IMO, Cain is toast, as is Bachmann, Santorum, etal.
Perry is still in the toaster but I suspect he's nicely brown and about to shoot out the top.
Gingrich, unfortunately will probably be the only alternative to Romney, and he's not very conservative himself and his head won't even fit in an oven let alone a toaster.
Which leaves Paul who is just a fruity toaster strudel.

[centralcal]

Per Michelle Malkin, Brian Lamb/C-Span has sent a letter to Chief Justice Roberts requesting to be allowed to cover the Obamacare oral arguments.

Oh well, at least they tried - I am sure the answer will be "No."

[Pofarmer]

"Mitt with his analytical and solution-based skills"

More govt solutions, huzzah!

We. Are. So. Screwed.

[Sara (Pal2Pal)]

More govt solutions, huzzah!

Yes, the man who has made millions putting private sector deals together is all for "more gov't solutions." Ugh!

Yes, the man who belongs to a religious organization which teaches that the gov't dole is nearly akin to being one of the seven deadly sins, is all for "more gov't solutions." Ugh! Ugh!

And, Pofarmer, tell me how a president can avoid gov't solutions when one is trying to reorganize the gov't and stop us from spiraling into total failure.

Even beloved Reagan knew you can't throw the baby out with the bath water. You have to work within the system and within existing law.

What I get out of all the anti-Romney rhetoric is that conservatives really want an Obama Administration, only with conservative rather than socialist views. Ram things through, pull all kinds of dirty deals behind closed doors, break the law with impunity as long as it advances the right agenda, etc. etc.

I quality president must know how the private sector works in order to govern with some sense (we see the alternative in action now), but a quality president must also know how government works in order to work within the constraints built in.

[JM Hanes]

Ignatz:

"Huh? 
Barry isn't far enough left for the OWS marxists."

I was talking about pealing off some of the public who sympathize with the protesters' general anger and frustration, not about attracting the occupiers themselves. If you look at the polls, Democrats have been pretty successful at co-opting public opinion and directing it at their favorite targets, without any pushback from Republicans. Here on the web, the right has been too busy enjoying the schadenfreude to pay much attention to the larger political dynamics and opportunities, ISTM.

[Barbara]

Gingrich, unfortunately will probably be the only alternative to Romney, and he's not very conservative himself and his head won't even fit in an oven let alone a toaster.

Good analysis, Ignatz. Perry should just gracefully bow out at this point.

Gingrich is too volatile a candidate for my comfort level. He talks a great conservative line when it suits his needs, but I never know what he truly believes. It's not just a question of flip-flops, it's his way of realigning his policy positions at a critical time that troubles me (e.g. coming out against the Ryan budget proposal). He dropped his support of President Bush when the going got tough in Iraq. That was just about the time he was touting "global warming" as his new crusade. And, of course, every time this happens, he and Calista have "just written another book..." to sell.

Granted, Gingrich is the brightest candidate on the stage. Nonetheless, his colorful and plentiful past history is troublesome.

That leaves the "anyone but" candidate, Mitt Romney. Given the way that the campaign has unraveled so far, he's not a bad choice.

[boris]

"the right has been too busy enjoying the schadenfreude to pay much attention to the larger political dynamics and opportunities, ISTM"

Don't see much opportunity to sell a "smaller government" remedy for "crony capitalism" to OWS sympathizers. For one thing it's probably not the "crony" part they're mad about.

[centralcal]

Right now, the RCP average for Romney this month is 22% (his single poll highest number is 28%). So, somewhere between 70-80% of Republican voters just don't seem to be wanting the "electable" candidate.

And that 70-80% of us who really, really don't cotton to Romney, are being told non-stop by the 22-28% (via commenters, blogs, pundits, media, blatherers, etc.) that he is our only hope!!!!!

[centralcal]

A fun video is making the rounds, called:

How Newt Debates

It is a fun montage of the debates so far. I really wish somebody would do a montage of the liberal nut jobs who have moderated these debates - Jon Harris, Jim Cramer, Scott Pelley, John King, etc. etc. I think it would make wonderful viewing for debate prep and, well, just for amusement!

[narciso]

They are certainly of the SDS variety, although may not have the determination of the Weathermen akin to the Montoneros faction of the Peronistas, which is present in the
Campora element around Madame Kirchner.

[Sara (Pal2Pal)]

And that 70-80% of us who really, really don't cotton to Romney, are being told non-stop by the 22-28% (via commenters, blogs, pundits, media, blatherers, etc.) that he is our only hope!!!!!

You have got to be kidding me! All I hear is what a shit bag he is, how he doesn't have any core principles, how he wants to sell the country down the river, how he is no better than Obama. You need to get around more.

The 22-28% are those limited number who have interacted with Romney in person either politically or in business and those who have gone to his town halls and personal appearances and don't take all their news from the left media and the far right.

[centralcal]

In a surprise move today, the seven major Republican candidates for president (who are not named “Mitt Romney”) decided to merge their campaigns, and run as a single corporate “person” they are now calling “Anybody But Romney, Incorporated.”

Just a little satirical humor from The Tatler.

[JM Hanes]

ccal:

"And that 70-80% of us who really, really don't cotton to Romney, are being told non-stop by the 22-28% "

You haven't noticed anybody pounding non-stop on Romney? 70-80% don't like Perry, Gingrich, Cain, Bachmann etc. either, of course.

[narciso]

Remind me again, who commissioned a toll where
74% said Sarah shouldn't even consider running, Who gets respectful, glowing press
and who doesn't.

Oh, that site the Tatler linked to, is nutroots central, just by the looks of the blogroll

[centralcal]

Oh, certainly I have noticed the pounding JMH, after all there couldn't be an anybody but Romney throng otherwise.

[centralcal]

Thanks for the head's up, narciso, I didn't follow the Tatler link.

[narciso]

It could be the Pitzer Troubadour's own blog roll, it's unray shielded, so tinfoil might
be required:

[Sara (Pal2Pal)]

This was the AP poll from a month ago.

Head-To-Head: (Obama/Candidate)

Mitt Romney 48/45 (-3)
Herman Cain 48/43 (-5)
Rick Perry 50/42 (-8)

A survey of 1,000 voters conducted October 13-17 with a MOE of +/-4.0% with a sub sample of 431 Republican/Republican leaning independents.

We have 7 candidates splitting the 100% and Romney still gets a third. He is close to 50% when the poll is extended nationally and not just primary conservative voters.

It is going to come down to Romney and probably Gingrich and then we'll see who gets over 50%. Unfortunately, as much as I like Newt and even predicted over two months ago that by Iowa, he would be in the lead, I am not sure he can win the General.

[Pofarmer]

"but a quality president must also know how government works in order to work within the constraints built in. "

A quality President would realize the system, is broken and we need a paradigm shift. Will Romney provide that?

"Yes, the man who has made millions putting private sector deals together is all for "more gov't solutions." Ugh!"

From what I understand, Bain Capital was mainly a corporate raider type of company. This from Wikipedia.

"Thus, Bain Capital turns a profit on floundering corporations by buying them at low cost, stripping away any projects that aren't profiting or that lack potential, and laying off any excess workers. One of the fund's first start-up investments was Staples, Inc., the $15 billion office supply retailer. The funding enabled Staples to expand from one store in 1986 to over 2000 stores in 2011."

I don't think you'll get a lot of sympathy for Romney on job creation.

[Ignatz]

--Oh, certainly I have noticed the pounding JMH, after all there couldn't be an anybody but Romney throng otherwise.--

Is that a vibrating throng?

[narciso]

Yes, Cain is just out of the question:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/11/15/obama-mistakenly-refers-to-hawaii-as-asia-during-summit/?test=latestnews

[narciso]

Submitted for your approval

http://legalinsurrection.com/2011/11/newt-gingrich-is-not-conservative-enough-for-er-romney-supporters/

[centralcal]

No kidding, narciso! Obummer just gave away the 57th state to Asia! Watch out Daddy, Alaska may soon be part of Russia.

[McCarran]

What was awful was his response to the collective bargaining rights for the public sector question.

Even FDR was against that, and even Nancy Pelosi doesn't fight for that.

I think once-Harry Reid floated the idea.

And Rush Limbaugh is wrong collective bargaining rights means you have the right to strike and air traffic controllers do not have that right.

[Ignatz]

McCarran nails it.

[Sara (Pal2Pal)]

A quality President would realize the system, is broken and we need a paradigm shift. Will Romney provide that?

So, Pofarmer, you prefer a privatized military. How 'bout treaties, do we turn them over to private enterprises to negotiate. Do we disband all the courts and Congress.

You want to trade a socialist dictator for a conservative one. Sorry, you are part of the 20%.

Bain isn't a corporate raider. They restructure companies in trouble back to profitability. Sometimes that means getting rid of dead weight.

Did you read what you posted? You don't think going from one store to over 2000 stores did not create a hell of a lot of jobs. Sheesh!

"Thus, Bain Capital turns a profit on floundering corporations by buying them at low cost, stripping away any projects that aren't profiting or that lack potential, and laying off any excess workers. One of the fund's first start-up investments was Staples, Inc., the $15 billion office supply retailer. The funding enabled Staples to expand from one store in 1986 to over 2000 stores in 2011."

[Melinda Romanoff]

Sara-

They do all the above.

And there is absolutely nothing wrong with any of it. Just another tool in the toolbox.

[Pofarmer]

Sara, why are you so verklempt over Romney? To the point of not making sense?

All I hear is Romney proposing this or that govt program to solve this or that govt problem. Only recently has he started taliing about LESS govt. What would you call Romney care? Less govt?

The paradigm shift I speak of is a shift from the view that govt can cure all ills, that govt spending and govt revenues are somehow sacrosanct. The view that some new program from Washington will "save" us. Romney is more of the same on that front.

"You don't think going from one store to over 2000 stores did not create a hell of a lot of jobs. Sheesh!"

Where were the jobs created? Was no one selling business supplies in these stores areas before?

[Barbara-Lurking]

BTW, I just got the pun in the title...I guess my evening glass of wine had to muddle my mind before the joke penetrated!

[Melinda Romanoff]

Po-

Eh, not so much that there might have been, but that what was there was provided more cheaply or more efficiently.

How many employees were in the first store? 4?

How many employees were there after the 2000th store? 8000? or 10,000, because you need a logistics company on top of the retail system to make sure the inventory hits the sales point.

I get your bias, but it cuts two ways here. It's efficiency of execution that makes the difference.

So I'm backing Sara, wholeheartedly, in this distinction.

And I will call to follow up.

[Sara (Pal2Pal)]

Could you name some of those government programs Romney has proposed?

Where were the jobs created? Was no one selling business supplies in these stores areas before?

I have no idea, but my town had nothing but a tumbleweed and a gas station just about in 1982 and now we have both an Office Depot and a Stapels, just like we have Home Depot and Lowes. And multi-fast food franchises and smaller restaurants.