[LWC]

http://news.yahoo.com/herman-cain-seriou...00704.html

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/66147.htm

What say you?

[Bob Seger]

http://news.yahoo.com/herman-cain-seriou...00704.html

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/66147.htm

What say you?

I dont know what poll it was, but I saw this morning that in a head to head run of Cain vs. Obama that Cain was actually 2% points ahead of Obama.

[LWC]

^wow!

[LWC]

More on Herman Cain and Mitt Romney:

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/romne...40072.html

[vundy33]

I dont know what poll it was, but I saw this morning that in a head to head run of Cain vs. Obama that Cain was actually 2% points ahead of Obama.

I seen the same thing, pretty much tied, which is very bad news for Pres Obama, no matter what poll. It was a CNN poll, by the way, that's all I could see.

[Hoot Gibson]

Herman Cain is a serious candidate but I have reservations about his ability to raise enough money quickly enough to win the Republican nomination. I think that Obama is in big trouble, no matter who Republicans nominate. I am looking forward to see who Obama taps for his running mate and what kind of lame excuse Biden uses from withdrawing from the ticket.

[Ring'Em Up]

Rick Perry will be your nominee. Period.
Barack Obama will begin his second term in January '13.

[Frank Dux]

I hope Perry isn't the nominee or we will see another BHO term in 2012. Perry can't tie his shoes or put together a logical sentence. All he wants to do is attack Mit and avoid every question because he has no real answer.

[Panther Thunder]

Rick Perry will be your nominee. Period.
Barack Obama will begin his second term in January '13.

God kill me if this is the case.

[jetpilot]

Rick Perry will be your nominee. Period.
Barack Obama will begin his second term in January '13.

No freaking way.

[vundy33]

Herman Cain is a serious candidate but I have reservations about his ability to raise enough money quickly enough to win the Republican nomination. I think that Obama is in big trouble, no matter who Republicans nominate. I am looking forward to see who Obama taps for his running mate and what kind of lame excuse Biden uses from withdrawing from the ticket.

I think these next few weeks/months are vital for Cain. If he's able to prove he's a serious contender, which I think he is, won't that mean many more supporters, therefore quite a bit more money? Especially if a few of those supporters have very deep pockets?

Am I way offbase here or what dudes?

[vundy33]

Also, if Rick Perry gets the nomination, I think I'd rather see Pres. Obama in another term, based on what I've seen from Perry so far, and public opinion of him. Don't try to kill me to fast men...lol. My reasoning for that is in the current state our country is in, I'm not sure if I would want a transition in the Presidency, and this guy (Perry) running it.

What do you think would be the safest bet? Rick Perry coming in in Jan 2013, or another Pres. Obama term? Try to leave out whatever you have against either, especially President Obama, and try to look at it solely based on who you think would do a better job at running this country sufficiently, based on your views.

And who do you guys support, at this moment? Or are leaning towards? I'd especially like to see NKY's, Jet's, Bob's, TRV and Hoot's answers, lol. Myself so far, I think I'm behind Cain at this point. I'm trying to read into his 9-9-9 plan as we speak. I think areas that he's not got experience in, like foreign policy, he can balance out with a good cabinet and his experience in other areas, like business and economics. What say you?

[Panther Thunder]

Also, if Rick Perry gets the nomination, I think I'd rather see Pres. Obama in another term, based on what I've seen from Perry so far, and public opinion of him. Don't try to kill me to fast men...lol. My reasoning for that is in the current state our country is in, I'm not sure if I would want a transition in the Presidency, and this guy (Perry) running it.

What do you think would be the safest bet? Rick Perry coming in in Jan 2013, or another Pres. Obama term? Try to leave out whatever you have against either, especially President Obama, and try to look at it solely based on who you think would do a better job at running this country sufficiently, based on your views.

And who do you guys support, at this moment? Or are leaning towards? I'd especially like to see NKY's, Jet's, Bob's, TRV and Hoot's answers, lol. Myself so far, I think I'm behind Cain at this point. I'm trying to read into his 9-9-9 plan as we speak. I think areas that he's not got experience in, like foreign policy, he can balance out with a good cabinet and his experience in other areas, like business and economics. What say you?

While I am not a Perry fan, The Republican in me would consider that the lesser of two evils if he were to defeat Obama. I am riding the Cain Train right now baby!!

[vundy33]

While I am not a Perry fan, The Republican in me would consider that the lesser of two evils if he were to defeat Obama. I am riding the Cain Train right now baby!!

I kind of agree, but again, I worry about the change in Presidency's, and how a new President (Perry) could hurt our country by coming in and changing things to quickly, trying to grant campaign promises, ect. That really goes for any candidate that any of you really disagree with thus far.

It's kind of like with my job, getting a new Commanding Officer, or a normal job, getting a new boss. If it's a guy that has worked under my CO, or just a good leader, he's going to come in level headed and start working on the things that need to be done, actual top priorities instead of trying to "make his mark" with dumb crap, it's going to be a better and easier transition for the entire unit/company. Now if there is a new CO/boss that comes in, a horrible leader that by trying to make his mark, help out friends, focus on his own agenda instead of what the entire unit/company needs to get better, it's not going to be an easy transition, at all. That is all that I'm worried about.

I'm young compared to most of you (hahaha nicker, and I missed the entire first 4 months of President Obama's campaign...is my worry something to actually be worried about? Or does history show us that our new Presidents/new cabinets are smart enough to focus on country first, and not party, ect?

From what I've found, most instances of this are pretty random...

[TidesHoss32]

Go Herman, Go! I believe that his inexperience will not hurt him. We've seen how well the "experienced" idiots in Washington have fared over the last three years. Herman would be fine in Washington. Just give me someone who wont apologize to leaders in other countries for being an American, someone that will back our true allies and give full support to Israel and someone that wont back down and will take care of business when needed. I have faith in Cain.

[LWC]

You can tell that the other candidates feel he is a legitimate candidate because they went after him and Romney HARD!

[Truth]

Cain probably cannot win. Nonetheless, he is far more qualified for the job than was the little fellow in the White House in 2008. In fact, Cain is still more qualified.

[Panther Thunder]

Cain probably cannot win. Nonetheless, he is far more qualified for the job than was the little fellow in the White House in 2008. In fact, Cain is still more qualified.

Peep this. Romney/Cain 2012-2020, Cain/Rubio 2020-2028, Rubio/? 2028-2036. :biggrin:

It should be a good 25 years.

[SKINNYPIG]

Cain probably cannot win. Nonetheless, he is far more qualified for the job than was the little fellow in the White House in 2008. In fact, Cain is still more qualified.

IMO there are four candidates that will not be wind checkers if elected. I believe Newt, Herman, Michelle and Ron will govern as statesman. If elected, Romney, Perry and Santorum will check the political breeze daily and go in the direction that benefits them the most. I'm certain we will frig it up and nominate a wind checker...But ANY of them will make a much better President than Obama.

[bigben]

Right now I think anybody can take the GOP nomination

[VHSL-helper]

1. Can a Republican get Congress to redo the tax code?
2. He makes me want to vote for Obama by default. His 9-9-9 reminds me of Dominos old 7-7-7 deal, which is kinda like a rip-off, since he was Godfathers CEO. Stuff like that makes we want to choose the original.

[Amun-Ra]

Just a little bit of info on the 999 plan.

http://www.liveimagephoto.com/2011/10/he...oblem.html

Either way I think that most Americans are going to get screwed no matter who is in office.

[TheRealThing]

I hope Perry isn't the nominee or we will see another BHO term in 2012. Perry can't tie his shoes or put together a logical sentence. All he wants to do is attack Mit and avoid every question because he has no real answer.

Well let's see, Clinton was a slick talker, Obama is a slicker talker, and Romney is a slick talker. I've been slick talked enough. Cain not so much and Perry I believe gets shook up by the confrontational and direct assaults by Romney. I believe Perry is insulted and appalled by Romney's brazen attacks and the fact that these are carried out on national TV further exacerbates the rather tongue-tied, back on his heels, posture he has been pushed into on these debate forums. Therefore, he doesn't do well and stumbles.

The only thing I am disappointed in Perry about is his position on educating illegal immigrants on the taxpayer dime. The government can't legally carve out any group to give advantages to. No citizen is higher than his neighbor and therefore it's not justifiable to give things to any ethnic group, social, or political group or individuals. The government started giving people things back during the "Great Society" social giveaway program, which LB Johnson dreamed up and set in motion. At first America could afford to do that and since the average citizen wasn't crowded financially by the giveaways we just sailed along without a whimper and let it happen. Since the inception of the LBJ program, the problems of the listless and the indegent have been more or less purchased by the US Federal Government in that we have by law guaranteeed a safety net for these folks for life. Where once we could afford as a nation to finance the give away programs for these folks, the explosion of their ranks and the ever expanding scope of handouts (food, housing, clothing, medical-care, utilities and even cell phones) have grown to the point where we can no longer actually pay for all of it. Now we must borrow money starting in July of each year. Once we have borrowed money from countries all over the planet we can continue to give it away to the non working element of society. Of course, let's not forget to mention our sworn enemies of the arab world, dictators of South America etc. Sorry, I do go on.

Cain could be a breath of fresh air if he surrounds himself with the right people and has the good sense to listen to them on matters of foriegn policy and the military. Common sense wise, I just love him. I worry that he will not be all that in a national campaign but, if he's the Republican nominee I will certainly vote for him. However, he is a novice and not a true statesman and it is impossible to for see the kinds of blunders me may make if elected. Romney is just a republican in name only and he worries me because of that. I don't trust him and his record does not support his present position on a number of issues least of which is Romney-Care. If it comes down to Obama or Romney it's still a no brainer, ROMNEY!

Ron Paul scares me because he would whittle the military down to a little nub. I could live with Newt for sure but, he has a little baggage, bounced checks and bimbos.

[TheRealVille]

He is the man with the mustache who takes a rebellious drag on a cigarette in the Herman Cain Internet ad gone viral.

"We've run a campaign like nobody's ever seen," he says before taking a puff. "But then America's never seen a candidate like Herman Cain."

Meet Mark Block, Cain's unorthodox campaign manager. Perhaps no one is more responsible for the Georgia businessman's meteoric rise in the presidential polls than Block, a Republican strategist and tea party leader who's left a trail of questionable campaign work behind him.

Block has been accused of voter suppression and was banned from running Wisconsin political campaigns for three years to settle accusations he coordinated a judge's re-election campaign with a special interest group.

Records show Block has faced foreclosure on his home, a tax warrant by the Internal Revenue Service and a lawsuit for an unpaid bill. He also acknowledges he was arrested twice for drunken driving.
--------------------SNIP------------------------------------------


Block's entry into politics came early. In 1974, he became the first 18-year-old elected to office in Wisconsin, capturing a seat on the Winnebago County Board of Supervisors.

But Block's reputation was marred when he was accused of illegally coordinating state Supreme Court Justice Jon Wilcox's 1997 re-election campaign with a special interest group that favored school vouchers. In 2001, he agreed to pay $15,000 and was banned from running Wisconsin political campaigns for three years to settle the case. Block made no admission of wrongdoing in the settlement. Block told the AP that he had not coordinated with the group and called the charges "ridiculous."




Read more:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...z1c5J5kart

[LWC]

^HEY! That is from some Non-Republican site...............

I love ya Segar and Hoot, but I had to say it, lol.

[TheRealVille]

^HEY! That is from some Non-Republican site...............

I love ya Segar and Hoot, but I had to say it, lol.

Ok, here you go, hehe. :biggrin: I'll give them one from their mothership. I wouldn't want to post something just from some liberal, "homo town" rag.

He is the man with the mustache who takes a rebellious drag on a cigarette in the Herman Cain Internet ad gone viral.
"We've run a campaign like nobody's ever seen," he says before taking a puff. "But then America's never seen a candidate like Herman Cain."
Meet Mark Block, Cain's unorthodox campaign manager. Perhaps no one is more responsible for the Georgia businessman's meteoric rise in the presidential polls than Block, a Republican strategist and tea party leader who's left a trail of questionable campaign work behind him.

Block has been accused of voter suppression and was banned from running Wisconsin political campaigns for three years to settle accusations he coordinated a judge's re-election campaign with a special interest group.
Records show Block has faced foreclosure on his home, a tax warrant by the Internal Revenue Service and a lawsuit for an unpaid bill. He also acknowledges he was arrested twice for drunken driving.
-------------------SNIP--------------------------

Block's entry into politics came early. In 1974, he became the first 18-year-old elected to office in Wisconsin, capturing a seat on the Winnebago County Board of Supervisors.
But Block's reputation was marred when he was accused of illegally coordinating state Supreme Court Justice Jon Wilcox's 1997 re-election campaign with a special interest group that favored school vouchers. In 2001, he agreed to pay $15,000 and was banned from running Wisconsin political campaigns for three years to settle the case. Block made no admission of wrongdoing in the settlement. Block told the AP that he had not coordinated with the group and called the charges "ridiculous."
Unable to make a living in politics, Block paid the bills stocking shelves at a Target. He has the "Mark" nametag mounted on his desk at Cain headquarters.
Block said it was during those tough times that his home went into foreclosure and his personal life unraveled, resulting in two arrests for drinking and driving.



Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/10/...z1c5as59ej

[Hoot Gibson]

I thought proximity of lowlifes to candidates did not matter to Obama fanboys. Obama's friendship with Jeremiah Wright, assorted communists, and terrorist Bill Ayers didn't matter but Herman Cain's hiring a campaign manager with a checkered past on a shoestring budget is supposed to damage Cain's campaign? Hypocrisy in action is an ugly spectacle.

[Deathstar 80]

I really don't like being involved with politics, but I thought of a slogan for Herman Cain:

"Yes we Cain!"

I'm sure President Obama will approve this slogan.

[TheRealVille]

Herman Cain, a Republican candidate for the 2012 presidential nomination, denied on Monday that he had sexually harassed women, rejecting a report that he was accused by two women when he was head of the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s.

Cain, who has stunned the political establishment with his rise to the top of the polls, issued the denial in an interview on Fox News.


Republican presidential candidate, Herman Cain, Oct. 31, 2011.



"I have never sexually harassed anyone," Cain told the conservative cable outlet.

He confirmed, however, that he had been accused but denied the allegations and said he was not involved in any payout.

Cain - a self-styled outsider relatively new to the national stage - faces a new level of scrutiny after a burst of momentum in the race for the Republican presidential nomination. He's been steadily at or near the top of national surveys and polls in early presidential nominating states, competitive with former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

In his denials to the report published on the website Politico, Cain said he did not know how the restaurant group had responded to the allegations.

"Yes, I was falsely accused while I was at the National Restaurant Association," he said.

Politico reported there was a settlement that amounted to five figures to the women.

"If there was a settlement, it was handled by some other officers at the National Restaurant Association," he said, adding that he hoped it would have been minimal because the accusations were false.

The report said the women signed agreements with the restaurant group that gave them five-figure financial payouts to leave the association and barred them from discussing their departures. Neither woman was identified.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/internationa...s-1.393026

Speaking at the National Press Club in Washington on Monday, Herman Cain continued to defend himself against claims that he sexually harassed two employees while leading a trade association in the 1990s, telling the audience that he's the victim of a "witch hunt."

As he had earlier in the day on Fox News Channel, Cain admitted that he had been accused of harassment while he was the president and chief executive of the National Restaurant Assn.

Cain insisted to the lunchtime crowd that the claims were false and said he did not know whether they were settled or how much it cost to settle them.

While Cain's speech to the Washington institution had been previously scheduled, the harassment story, first reported Sunday evening by Politico, ensured that it was swarming with reporters and cameras.

As Cain spoke, NBC News reported that it had confirmed that one woman who worked at the association received a settlement after complaining about Cain's conduct.

“I would be delighted to clear the air,” he told questioner Mark Hamrick in a question and answer session that followed his standard stump speech. “In all my over 40 years of business experience. . . of running businesses and corporations, I have never sexually harassed anyone.”

But, he added, when he was accused of sexual harassment – “falsely accused, I might add….as leader of the organization, I recused myself and allowed my general counsel and human resources officer to deal with the situation.”

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-...olitics%29

[TheRealVille]

During Herman Cain’s tenure as the head of the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s, at least two female employees complained to colleagues and senior association officials about inappropriate behavior by Cain, ultimately leaving their jobs at the trade group, multiple sources confirm to POLITICO.

The women complained of sexually suggestive behavior by Cain that made them angry and uncomfortable, the sources said, and they signed agreements with the restaurant group that gave them financial payouts to leave the association. The agreements also included language that bars the women from talking about their departures.

In a series of comments over the past 10 days, Cain and his campaign repeatedly declined to respond directly about whether he ever faced allegations of sexual harassment at the restaurant association. They have also declined to address questions about specific reporting confirming that there were financial settlements in two cases in which women leveled complaints.

POLITICO has confirmed the identities of the two female restaurant association employees who complained about Cain but, for privacy concerns, is not publishing their names.

Cain spokesman J.D. Gordon told POLITICO the candidate indicated to campaign officials that he was “vaguely familiar” with the charges and that the restaurant association’s general counsel had resolved the matter.

The latest statement came from Cain himself. In a tense sidewalk encounter Sunday morning outside the Washington bureau of CBS News — where the Republican contender had just completed an interview on “Face the Nation” — Cain evaded a series of questions about sexual harassment allegations.

Cain said he has “had thousands of people working for me” at different businesses over the years and could not comment “until I see some facts or some concrete evidence.” His campaign staff was given the name of one woman who complained last week, and it was repeated to Cain on Sunday. He responded, “I am not going to comment on that.”

He was then asked, “Have you ever been accused, sir, in your life of harassment by a woman?”

He breathed audibly, glared at the reporter and stayed silent for several seconds. After the question was repeated three times, he responded by asking the reporter, “Have you ever been accused of sexual harassment?”

Cain was president and CEO of the National Restaurant Association from late 1996 to mid-1999. POLITICO learned of the allegations against him, and over the course of several weeks, has put together accounts of what happened by talking to a lengthy roster of former board members, current and past staff and others familiar with the workings of the trade group at the time Cain was there.

In one case, POLITICO has seen documentation describing the allegations and showing that the restaurant association formally resolved the matter. Both women received separation packages that were in the five-figure range.

On the details of Cain’s allegedly inappropriate behavior with the two women, POLITICO has a half-dozen sources shedding light on different aspects of the complaints.

The sources — including the recollections of close associates and other documentation — describe episodes that left the women upset and offended. These incidents include conversations allegedly filled with innuendo or personal questions of a sexually suggestive nature, taking place at hotels during conferences, at other officially sanctioned restaurant association events and at the association’s offices. There were also descriptions of physical gestures that were not overtly sexual but that made women who experienced or witnessed them uncomfortable and that they regarded as improper in a professional relationship.

Peter Kilgore, who was the association’s general counsel in the 1990s, and remains in that position today, has declined to comment to POLITICO on whether any settlements existed, saying he cannot discuss personnel matters.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/67194.html