Video for Cain fans..

[santahog]

Watch this and think about the best candidate, please..
Thanks..
Joe
http://www.c-span.org/Events/Cain-Gingrich-Debate-Lincoln-Douglas-Style/10737425199-1/

[JLawson]

Joe, thanks for posting this link.  I doubt that I would have found it otherwise.  This "debate" was one of the most enjoyable politics-oriented presentations I've viewed in a long time.  I wish all of the presidential debates were conducted using the Lincoln-Douglas format.  It becomes more of a discussion or conversation rather than a "how many times can I stab you" contest.  Very informative and educational.  Whether you agree or disagree with their particular positions, the viewer is able to walk away with a much better understanding having listened to fully-formed statements instead of the sound bites we endure in the typical combative format.  The more casual format enabled the participants to showcase not only their knowledge but also their wit and humor.

[santahog]

Full disclosure.. I'm supporting Gingrich in the primary. This format is his idea. He's been pushing it since 08. It's based on Lincoln-Douglas debates. I appreciate the format too.

[tombogan03884]

Newt is a fine historian, and under normal circumstances might make a great President.
But these are not normal circumstances, our problems are to focused on the economy, I think we are better off voting for Cain who has a history of turning around this type of situation.
Newt could not get elected any way, he has been out of politics to long and to many who do remember him he was to demonized by the dems for what were actually sound policies.
If by some chance he is the Nominee I would however , vote for him with out hesitation.

[fightingquaker13]

I love the idea of the L/D debates. But, the hour and a half format is way too much. Who's going to listen to it? Fit it into the College forensics format and cut it in half. People will listen to 45/60 minutes, but an hour and a half to two hours? Not so much. After the debate, I like Newt. I always have, I just don't think he's electable.
FQ13

[Sponsor]

[tombogan03884]

The biggest problem Newt has is that he suggests methods and policies that have been used successfully in the past and lays out the historical precedents.
This costs him votes for 2 reasons, it takes to long and looses the "Short Attention Span Voters", and it doesn't enable the emotional needs of the rest of the assholes.

[santahog]

"Unelectable"...
What does that mean, exactly, if two or three are happy to vote for a person?
I don't mean to stuff it back at you, and there are candidates on the Repub side that I find unacceptable in any situation, but what I understand about that word is that it's used by someone who believes he has something to lose by said unelectable candidate winning...
I watched a room full of people who came in as a herd of cats declare almost unanimously that Newt won that debate last night.
As short a memory as the electorate seems to have, how is Newt unelectable in a general election, if he can beat Obama in a debate?
Know what I mean?
Joe

[tombogan03884]

"Unelectable"...
What does that mean, exactly, if two or three are happy to vote for a person?
I don't mean to stuff it back at you, and there are candidates on the Repub side that I find unacceptable in any situation, but what I understand about that word is that it's used by someone who believes he has something to lose by said unelectable candidate winning...
I watched a room full of people who came in as a herd of cats declare almost unanimously that Newt won that debate last night.
As short a memory as the electorate seems to have, how is Newt unelectable in a general election, if he can beat Obama in a debate?
Know what I mean?
Joe

I didn't take it that way.
By "unelectable" I  mean that he can not get enough votes to win.
Newt's worst opponent will not be Obama, a road killed squirrel could beat him.
Like Cain, Newts toughest fight will be against the Rep leadership who want more "Business as usual" with that RINO POS Romney who I fear will wind up with the nomination.
The Rep leadership would rather see 4 more years of Obama than admit that they are answerable to any one, let alone  people like the Tea Party.
The problem with established political parties is their priorities are not ours.
The first consideration is fund raising and the power of the Party, second is getting loyal members reelected.
The good of the country, the Constitution and all that other stuff they are supposed to be concerned with comes , at best, third.
This is why the Federalist Papers spent so much time warning about the "evils of faction".
Unfortunately there is no way to protect against it. Like minded people will band together to achieve their goals as will their proteges until eventually the focus shifts from doing the best for the country to doing the best for the group.

When you vote in your states Primary remember, the Dems don't have a hope in hell of getting BO reelected, only the Republicans can do that by nominating a POS.

[JC5123]

When you vote in your states Primary remember, the Dems don't have a hope in hell of getting BO reelected, only the Republicans can do that by nominating a POS.

It makes me wonder how much difference there really is in the parties. Or rather, how much cooperation there is between the RNC, and the DNC. We have been seeing the same names in politics for 30+ years. Some longer than I have been alive. It's the fact that politics is profitable is the real problem. There is too much quid pro quo that goes on, and that is why party only matters in front of the camera. Behind the scenes these guys are all part of the club. Idealism is no longer a desired trait in Washington. Until it is again, republicans will always be snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

[tombogan03884]

It makes me wonder how much difference there really is in the parties. Or rather, how much cooperation there is between the RNC, and the DNC. We have been seeing the same names in politics for 30+ years. Some longer than I have been alive. It's the fact that politics is profitable is the real problem. There is too much quid pro quo that goes on, and that is why party only matters in front of the camera. Behind the scenes these guys are all part of the club. Idealism is no longer a desired trait in Washington. Until it is again, republicans will always be snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

There is still a LOT of difference between the Parties.
The Dems are firmly focused on promoting their socialist agenda of spreading the poverty to all but the acceptable elite.
The Reps on the other hand having been wandering cluelessly since the Cold war ended.
The Tea Party movement could give them the renewed purpose they should have been focused on but they have to overcome the established leadership which has out lived it's issues.