Does anybody else think that Herman Cain is totally wasting his time and energy being a Republican candidate? I don't think there's any way he'd carry the south. That's completely wrong, but I feel that's how it is. Even if the guy has the exact platform desired by the right-wingers, when voters here get the ballot they just won't be able to vote for the 'black guy'.  I think they'd have a big problem with a 'weirdo mormon' as well. A woman would be problematic also.  I guess that leaves Rick Perry or Ron Paul.

Views: 159

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I haven't figured out why the former chairman of a Pizza chain and Federal Reserve chairman is qualified to be president.  No experience in public office.  He might carry some of the south, given his conservatism and his religion.  I wouldn't want another right wing christian (hes a baptist minister) running the country.  Even Sarah Palin has more experience than he has.  Who knows, though - politics can be unpredictable.
Mark it down as a prediction.  Mitt Romney/Chris Christie are the 2012 ticket.
indeed. i'm guessing cathlic/mormons uniting under racist freak crap; lame indeed
they're nuts. romney's nuts. they're all palin-style money hoarding bad for freethinking families and folks that just want to work for living..

who'd really wanna vote for those that eat themselves anyhow?
put down the so-called holy myth books and the clickers folks! those LCD's are suckn' yer brains!
n 'mine too !LOL
he's a lost soul indeed. hate to say it but media ho too
Rick Perry is actually 3rd in the polls behind Romney and Cain.
the bin laden ace is in the militant? democrats' pocket
Ron Paul looks like a good candidate.

I totally agree.  He's the only candidate, in a long time, who I had to actively go looking for his religious views.  He's definitely a christian and a pro-lifer, but I have yet to see a view he has that goes against the Constitution.  I was paying attention to the anti-Ron propaganda and had my faith in him shaken a bit, but when I looked into the FULL information of his quotes, he's still on the Constitutional legality track.  He understands where the federal government's powers end.  He plans to take away a lot of things people have gotten used to, but, good and bad, he's right.  The federal government is spending tax money illegally and that's tax money that shouldn't have been taken from us in the first place.  In my eyes, he truly is a defender of the Constitution.  He's trying to give states the right to make the laws they want, as defined in the Constitution.  In some states, it'll suck for the residents, yes, but that's the way the Founding Fathers intended it to be.  Each state decides for themselves.  Separation of power is a crucial element in that founding document.  Federal government's role is supposed to be absolutely minimal for the very reason that we left empire of the Church of England.  Total rule by the few over the many is a bad way to go.  Our Constitution says first, "We the people...".

It sounds like you are confusing the Constitution with the Articles of Confederation

How so?



Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


© 2017   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service