DZComposer Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 Looks like Herman Cain is done. I'm surprised he lasted this long, to be honest. I believe he never was seriously running. He never set up any nationwide infrastructure. I think he just surged in the polls because he wasn't Michelle Bachmann or Rick Perry and he sure as HELL wasn't the Morman Waffle Iron Mitt Romney. He, like New Gingrich, I feel are not serious candidates (Gingrich doesn't have a national infrastructure, either). Gingrich also can't seem to keep his pants zipped up (How come he gets to run, when John Edwards can't?). I think they saw how Sarah Palin became a moneymaker after she was picked as McCain's VP, so they ran for president to increase how much they could get away with charging in speaking fees, as Sarah Palin did. At least Gingrich knows politics, though. Cain? Well, I'll just leave this here: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox_McCloud2011 Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 LOL. FUNNY AS HELL. By the way, why Pokemon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DZComposer Posted December 4, 2011 Author Share Posted December 4, 2011 I don't know. Though, when he bowed-out today, he finally admitted he got the quote from Pokemon: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harlow Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 Well, serious or not, I really thoguht he was the best man of the bunch. Now instead of electing someone capable and replacing the current, you're just going to replace the current. Other option I thought was Ron Paul, but I don't think he can tally up. Hope it's not the mormon whacko. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
"User" Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 Sad thing is this GOP crop is so pathetic that Obama is poised to be the first president to be reelected with the economic and unemployment as bad as it is since the Great Depression. If Obama gets reelected it will be because the GOP field is so bad - not because of his qualities as Commander in Chief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TCPeppyTc Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 I always believed that Romney was a foregone conclusion for GOP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unoservix Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 He probably still is, but the GOP's voters are so desperate to somehow avoid the encroaching reality of Mitt that they've embraced Newt friggin' Gingrich as their latest savior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TCPeppyTc Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 Even though Gingrich is pretty conservative, it seems he could stand a reasonable chance. Provided of course he doesnt turn out to be really stupid or have done bad things. Even if this woman hadnt come forward about the affair, I think Cain would have been finished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unoservix Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 you...obviously don't know much about Newt Gingrich. "really stupid" and "did bad things" kind of completely sums up his career. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
"User" Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 Even though Gingrich is pretty conservative, it seems he could stand a reasonable chance. Provided of course he doesnt turn out to be really stupid or have done bad things. Even if this woman hadnt come forward about the affair, I think Cain would have been finished. Yeah, the guy has had a pretty "interesting" past to say the least...look up his history and you'll see what I mean. >_> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harlow Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 Wait there. Perry's bad Mitt's bad Michelle's bad Now Gingrich adds on the list. Does this means Paul's the only one left? Or that the GOP's screwed and needs of Cain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TCPeppyTc Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 I know a little about him, but still dont think hes that bad. I know he divorced three times. He was a hypocritical A-hole during Clinton years, largely contributing to the current culture of partisanship in washington today. That whole " death bed divorce" thing is a myth. He visited wife on her deathbed, and they mutually discussed divorce, and she brought subject up. That being said I dont know a ton about him. Yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jesseboyd7 Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 This is interesting. After Cain dropped out, all of those candidates continues to battle the race out. Newt Gingrich, the next front runner? The question is, is Newt another political scammer? A typical double minded one too? Will Newt stick to constitutional values? Lets see this video clip from his quotes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unoservix Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 the deathbed divorce is...really not a myth, if you ask his wife, especially since it happened twice. but either way, since conservatives have apparently decided to make an exception to their family values for him, the real problem is that if you thought Mitt Romney was a slimy, insincere, hypocritical, self-interested politician who will say anything he thinks you want to hear and then follow only his own interest and lie out of both sides of his mouth to do it, Newt Gingrich is that, turned up to eleven. if he really does win the nomination, Obama has this one in the bag. nobody likes politicians, but at least Obama can put up a pretense of not being one. Newt Gingrich cannot. and next year is not the year to be running as a politician. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DZComposer Posted December 6, 2011 Author Share Posted December 6, 2011 Ron Paul is too radical, even for the tea baggers. It's just that his supporters are very loud. He's not a clean-slate, either, though. I love how everyone ignores Ron Paul's hanging out with racists, and the racist articles that ran in his newsletter for over 15 years (It matters not whether he wrote them, the fact that the were published without caveat or rebuttal in the newsletter bearing his name serves as endorsement. He could have stopped it.). Not to mention his hypocrisy over federal disaster aid. He moans about the government cleaning up Hurricanes, yet his district is one of the largest recipients of federal hurricane preparedness money on the gulf coast. We had out last lecture in my presidency class today. The prof told us that it is pretty much a toss-up in the general because the republican field is so bad. Newt is too much like Bob Dole in 1996 (old news trying to be relevant again), Romney is too much like Tom Dewey in 1952 (Looks TOO good, and comes off as mechanical), and Rick Perry is just too freaking stupid to be president (As a Texan I agree with this, he's a moron on the Wheatley scale). The others just aren't popular enough to stand a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TCPeppyTc Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 @DZ. You say Rick Perry is stupid. Tell me is he stupider than GWB? I think that he is. Even if GWBs father got him into Yale, he still had to have been pretty smart to even do OK there. Ill have to tell my cousin about your observations on Ron Paul. He is an avid Libertarian. It's sort of funny and sad. None of the Republicans have that much gravitas, at the level of Richard Nixon or Reagen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harlow Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 Well, options given and analyzed, I think you might be better with Gingrich or Paul than any other one out there. I don't know about Santorum yet, but he's not popular. Deos this means that every possible spectre of the elections, rather be change or reelection, you're screwed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TCPeppyTc Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 Why you like conservative candidates so much? and What is wrong with Mr. Romney in your opinion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
"User" Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 @DZ. You say Rick Perry is stupid. Tell me is he stupider than GWB? I think that he is. Even if GWBs father got him into Yale, he still had to have been pretty smart to even do OK there. Ill have to tell my cousin about your observations on Ron Paul. He is an avid Libertarian. It's sort of funny and sad. None of the Republicans have that much gravitas, at the level of Richard Nixon or Reagen. I love how people try and portray Bush as stupid or something when really the evidence suggests the opposite. The average IQ is 100. Bush scored 1206 on the SAT during his final year of prep school at Phillips Academy which has been correlated to an I.Q. of 120. The score that Bush received on his qualifying test for the military suggests that his IQ was in the mid 120's, placing him in the 95th percentile of the population for intelligence. Furthermore, an article published in the journal Political Psychology, estimated Bush's IQ at 125. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xortberg Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 People try and portray Bush as stupid because of all the times he made himself look stupid. You know, the sort of thing a normal, everyday person who isn't interested enough in Bush to look up his SAT score and find out what I.Q. that correlates to and then find out whether said I.Q. score is above or below average is likely to see. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
"User" Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 People try and portray Bush as stupid because of all the times he made himself look stupid. You know, the sort of thing a normal, everyday person who isn't interested enough in Bush to look up his SAT score and find out what I.Q. that correlates to and then find out whether said I.Q. score is above or below average is likely to see. Oh I know that. I'm just trying to put out there that acting/doing something stupid or immature doesn't always correlate to actual intelligence. I know quite a few people who act stupid or say stupid things but I know they're actually pretty damn smart - it's just that in their case they have that type of personality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psygonis Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 SAT and I.Q. scores don't correlate with all intelligence types that exist you know. Waving these prove nothing about "actual" intelligence and even less about one's suitability to govern a country... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
"User" Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 SAT and I.Q. scores don't correlate with all intelligence types that exist you know. Waving these prove nothing about "actual" intelligence and even less about one's suitability to govern a country... Well how would you go about and define "actual" intelligence then? There are nine main types of intelligence and how one measures it won't be the same for everyone. Yes, while I know that SAT and I.Q. scores aren't the be all and end all I'm just throwing out these numbers as somewhat of a rebuttal against everyone who thinks the man isn't that bright. I should have pointed out earlier I guess that I was intending to play devil's advocate with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drasiana Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 People think he isn't smart because they see him doing and saying stupid shit all the time. Making a complete ass of yourself and then going "nuh uh, look, this piece of paper makes me an official smart person!" is even more pathetic. It falls into the same mentality of "respect is earned, not given", I won't believe you're smart just because you go around telling people that you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unoservix Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 why the hell are we arguing about Bush's IQ or SAT scores or whatever as measures of his mental fitness as president when we've got the great big clusterfuck that was his presidency to explain that for us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts