• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Herman Cain: For real or not

Is Herman Cain for Real?

  • Yes he can win the nomination

    Votes: 6 20.7%
  • No, He's just the GOP's flavor of the week

    Votes: 12 41.4%
  • Other/Unsure

    Votes: 7 24.1%
  • Something else. Like maybe a Turtle

    Votes: 4 13.8%

  • Total voters
    29
Obama's only experience is being a senator. That's not impressive!

Correct, however it is experience that was similar to at least some past Presidents that the public has elected and is significantly more than what Herman Cain has.

Also Herman Cain has much more experience than a CEO of a pizza company. He responds to the critique quite well, and mention the dozens of achievements in his life.

Yes, he does...however I disagree 100% of him responding well to the critique and its the critique that will be used against him a fair bit. He's got a lot of achievements on a personal and professional level...however he's a rookie when it comes to the political arena. He's an undrafted Free Agent coming in saying he should be paid like Peyton Manning because he was really good at Rugby and its a similar type of sport.

Both of them are hypocrites, but what I'm saying is that the management experience of Obama is less than Cain. Hence, they won't be able to criticize Cain for not being experienced enough.

Obama's relevant "management" experience...which really the Obama administration should LAUGH at such a use right off the bat anyways, being an executive of a government is not equivilent ot "management" experience which sounds as much like something Joe the manager at Home Depot has as it does what the POTUS should have...may've been less than Cain's. Its absolutely not now with Obama actually having experience on the job itself. And again, Obama and Herman Cain are equal when it comes to Executive experience with regards to running government...Zero. However Obama had significantly more, and that's something, political experience than Cain did taking 2008 Obama and he's got leaps and bounds more now.

Most people don't even want a politician.

And you make that bet. I'm going to take the safe money on a 200+ year trend. Unlike 2008, there's not nearly enough other factors to outweigh the trend that's being broken nor do I think the public's issue with that trend is as reduced as it was in regards to the trend in 2008 (race).
 
His experience was in voting "present". His Senate experience consisted of running for president and being against things he then became for once he was president.

Again, you show your true intent here.

Yes, Obama voted Present a lot. He did not vote present in 100% of votes, its still absolutely possible to be knowledgable and involved in the process by voting Present, and it doesn't remove him from the experience dealing with the various portions of government. No, simply put, you're wrong. Factually, 100%, wrong going off partisan spin of reality rather than actual facts.
 
I don't know. I've seen his website, and there's a lot of great TALK there, but I'm not sure how much of it he would really be willing/able to DO once he got into office. I also don't see anything there on one of the most important issues in my mind.... The Right to Keep and Bear Arms. He's definitely a better option than Romney but he doesn't seem to have the ideological fire of a Rick Perry, so we'll have to see.
 
When Democrats and liberal pundits are on TV touting the value of Ron Paul, its a pretty safe bet that they know who they would like to see run against their guy...

Just Jon Stewart as far as I can tell but the segment was true about media bias. Although Jon has always been a Paul fan even when there was no election, nothing out of the blue. Most democrats would think Romney as the best choice.

As for Cain, I can deep dish of his past. He is no better than Obama in some cases.
 
Last edited:
Again, you show your true intent here.

LOL, it's not a secret that I do not support Obama. (nor Perry or Romney)

Yes, Obama voted Present a lot. He did not vote present in 100% of votes, its still absolutely possible to be knowledgable and involved in the process by voting Present, and it doesn't remove him from the experience dealing with the various portions of government. No, simply put, you're wrong. Factually, 100%, wrong going off partisan spin of reality rather than actual facts.

Yes but voting "present" is a political position, not one of principle. People are tired of this.
 
Last edited:
Zyphlin: You seem to value political experience in front of business experience. I think a lot of people disagree with you. I believe it is much more impressive to be a chairman at the federal reserve, director at Pillsbury, and CEO of Godfather's Pizza than to be a lousy senator. If I'm going to care about political experience, they better be Governors.

Some of the best Presidents in the US, had very little political experience. I think the most important quality for a President is to be able to connect to people. Obama doesn't explain his reforms very well, or the need for them.

Most conservatives don't want another politician or everyone would be jumping on the Gingrich train!
 
Last edited:
Zyphlin: You seem to value political experience in front of business experience. I think a lot of people disagree with you. I believ it is much more impressive to be a chairman at the federal reserve, director at Pillsbury, and CEO of Godfather's Pizza than to be a lousy senator. If I'm going to care about political experience, they better be Governors. Some of the best Presidents in the US, had very little political experience. I think the most important quality for a President is to be able to connect to people. Obama doesn't explain his reforms very well, or the need for them.

Most conservatives don't want another politician or everyone would be jumping on the Gingrich train!

The Fed reserve example makes me a bit quesy.
 
New polls have come out today, showing Herman Cain with large primary leads in West Virginia, North Carolina, Nebraska, and a 24 point lead in his home state of Georgia. This is coupled with some strong momentum in national polling over the last two weeks. So what do you think? Does he have a real chance of winning the nomination or is he just the current holder of the "Anyone but Romney" weak support right now? I personally think he will fade in the coming three months as this "Anyone but Romney" feeling continues to cycle between Gingrich, Perry, Bachmann, Santorum, Cain, and maybe Palin if she decides to run.

Romney would be dead last on my list too. Anyone who condones socialist health care is totally unqualified to be President. Romney should RESIGN immediately.

Herman Cain is one of the best candidates in the race. One thing I like is that he is not a politician. Another is that he has business experience and has proven again and again that he knows and strongly supports common sense economics that many other Republicans and nearly all Democrats just can't grasp.

Herman Cain is really on a roll now. He has just won two more polls.

If Ron Paul somehow can't make it, Herman Cain will likely be my second choice. GO HERMAN!
 
Him being the fed charmain isn't a redeeming quality at all.

As far as political vs business experience goes... Most people think he'll fix the economic issues facing this nation. Problem is that he was flat out wrong on the housing bubble which led to the recession.

Commentary: The Media Say the Economy Is Horrible, So It Must Be True /sarcasm

Aug 17, 2005: You could write a book just on how poor the coverage has been of the alleged housing bubble. The media have been foretelling a massive bust in housing prices for months now. On May 19, ABCs Elizabeth Vargas said: The run up in housing prices is now beginning to look something like the boom in Internet stocks, and we know what happened there. That kind of ignorance makes homeowners fear that their most expensive possession could turn worthless overnight. That wont happen. No matter how much the media compared Bush to Herbert Hoover last year, this is not the Great Depression.

Fall 2005: Booming housing market halts abruptly; from the fourth quarter of 2005 to the first quarter of 2006, median prices nationwide dropped of 3.3 percent.[41]
Year-end: A total of 846,982 properties were in some stage of foreclosure in 2005.[42]

2006: Continued market slowdown. Prices are flat, home sales fall, resulting in inventory buildup. U.S. Home Construction Index is down over 40% as of mid-August 2006 compared to a year earlier. A total of 1,259,118 foreclosures were filed during the year, up 42 percent from 2005.[43]

I got some more of Cain's great decisions if you need them.
 
LOL, it's not a secret that I do not support Obama. (nor Perry or Romney)

There's nothing wrong with not supporting Obama...I don't support Obama...but one can not support him and still be realistic and reasonable regarding things dealing with him.

Yes but voting "present" is a political position, not one of principle. People are tired of this.

Again...

1) Irrelevant to his amount of experience if you feel its a "political position" not one of principle
2) I do think people say they want principle, I also think voting trends and history says that in the end they'd prefer to trust an experienced politician.

I'm in no way saying I agree with that notion, but my own opinion doesn't necessarily represent the masses nor hold any kind of historical basis for having said opinion.
 
Zyphlin: You seem to value political experience in front of business experience. I think a lot of people disagree with you.

I do value political experience, in a generalized sense, than business experience when it comes to a political position. I disagree with you regarding a "lot" of people disagreeing with me as well. Anecdotally, I've seen a segment of republican base touting Cain as if he's experienced and almost no Independents, No Democrats, and a good number of Republicans all saying he's got significant issues with it. Factually, I don't know of any polls done on peoples opinions of that yet but I can look at the way Presidential campaigns have gone over the years and never has the electorate even got CLOSE to voting for someone that would give an indication that the voters will value business experience more than political experience.

Some of the best Presidents in the US, had very little political experience.

Who?

Most conservatives don't want another politician or everyone would be jumping on the Gingrich train!

You speak for most conservatives now? Some conservatives wanted Bachmann, she's another politician. So is those who wanted Paul. And those who wanted Perry. And those who wanted ANYONE but Herman Cain, which there are far more conservatives that want someone other than Herman Cain then there are those who want Herman Cain. So no, considering that the majority of conservatives support a candidate that is a politician rather than one that isn't, I wouldn't say that "most" conservatives don't want another politician.

I will say though that a thing Cain has going for him over someone like Santorum or even Bachmann is his focus is largely on economic issues and very little on social issues which, given the nature of the electorate this season and the government atmosphere, I think is a benefit towards his candidacy over some others.
 
Last edited:
There's nothing wrong with not supporting Obama...I don't support Obama...but one can not support him and still be realistic and reasonable regarding things dealing with him.

Sorry, you are right. LOL I just dismiss his service since he really did nothing while serving as I note other than vote present and argue against things he ended up being for.

The CEO may make his son senior VP while the son's only real job is to draw a paycheck, but he did hold the job.

Again...

1) Irrelevant to his amount of experience if you feel its a "political position" not one of principle
2) I do think people say they want principle, I also think voting trends and history says that in the end they'd prefer to trust an experienced politician.

I'm in no way saying I agree with that notion, but my own opinion doesn't necessarily represent the masses nor hold any kind of historical basis for having said opinion.

A bunch of experienced politicians were tossed last year.
 
cain_on_housingbubble1.jpg


Commentary: The Media Say the Economy Is Horrible, So It Must Be True /sarcasm

Aug 17, 2005: You could write a book just on how poor the coverage has been of the alleged housing bubble. The media have been foretelling a massive bust in housing prices for months now. On May 19, ABCs Elizabeth Vargas said: The run up in housing prices is now beginning to look something like the boom in Internet stocks, and we know what happened there. That kind of ignorance makes homeowners fear that their most expensive possession could turn worthless overnight. That wont happen. No matter how much the media compared Bush to Herbert Hoover last year, this is not the Great Depression.



housing-bubble2.jpg

Fall 2005: Booming housing market halts abruptly; from the fourth quarter of 2005 to the first quarter of 2006, median prices nationwide dropped of 3.3 percent.[41]
Year-end: A total of 846,982 properties were in some stage of foreclosure in 2005.[42]

2006: Continued market slowdown. Prices are flat, home sales fall, resulting in inventory buildup. U.S. Home Construction Index is down over 40% as of mid-August 2006 compared to a year earlier. A total of 1,259,118 foreclosures were filed during the year, up 42 percent from 2005.[43]



Elected for economics cannot see economic bust.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, you are right. LOL I just dismiss his service since he really did nothing while serving as I note other than vote present and argue against things he ended up being for.

The CEO may make his son senior VP while the son's only real job is to draw a paycheck, but he did hold the job.

Again, comparing Obama to a son that is senior VP but never shows up to work is not comparable. Yes, he voted present a lot. He did not vote for it 100% of the time. Yes, he was campaigning while in the Senate, however he didn't spend 100% of his time while in the Senate doing that. Obama is no way possible comparable to someone who just gets a paycheck without EVER showing up to do the job.

Yes, you're dismissing his service due to your own hyperbolic view of his actions while in those positions and on top of that you're then extrapolating your hyperbolic view onto the electorate expecting them to view Obama's experience in a simple way which is just a bit of nonsense.

EVEN if your argument was correct, Cain would have to deftly...in ways no Republican has managed to do in 2008 or since...convince the public of that argument being true rather than what it appears on the surface which is that Obama has a decades worth of experience in government.

A bunch of experienced politicians were tossed last year.

Yep, on lower level elections where historically there's been a far larger chance for a non-experienced politician to break through then the Presidency. Experienced politicians being tossed out on a congressional level, especially at a representitive level, is not entirely unusual. It is unheard of in regards to the Presidency.
 
Again, comparing Obama to a son that is senior VP but never shows up to work is not comparable. Yes, he voted present a lot. He did not vote for it 100% of the time. Yes, he was campaigning while in the Senate, however he didn't spend 100% of his time while in the Senate doing that. Obama is no way possible comparable to someone who just gets a paycheck without EVER showing up to do the job.

It should be for someone saying that we need political experience.

[qoute]Yes, you're dismissing his service due to your own hyperbolic view of his actions while in those positions and on top of that you're then extrapolating your hyperbolic view onto the electorate expecting them to view Obama's experience in a simple way which is just a bit of nonsense. [/quote]

There is plenty to be against Obama about, I'm not too concerned over poeple concerning themselves over his experience.

EVEN if your argument was correct, Cain would have to deftly...in ways no Republican has managed to do in 2008 or since...convince the public of that argument being true rather than what it appears on the surface which is that Obama has a decades worth of experience in government.

If that's the position it's one to run against. "Obama had decades worth of experience and look at how poorly he has done".

Yep, on lower level elections where historically there's been a far larger chance for a non-experienced politician to break through then the Presidency. Experienced politicians being tossed out on a congressional level, especially at a representitive level, is not entirely unusual. It is unheard of in regards to the Presidency.

Nobody was more experienced that Bush I but yet a governor beat him.
 
His name isn't spelled Bachmann and she has no chance. His name isn't Palin nor Perry either. The accusation was that Cain would start with a serious disadvantage. I asked why that would be.

Now, I then said that nobody that runs against Obama would have a serious disadvantage. Bachmann nor Palin, and it seems less and less likely that Perry will be running against Obama.

Things can change but it seems right now Romney and Cain are the front runners. Will either be at a serious disadvantage and if you believe so, why?

You said that nobody would have a serious disadvantage against Obama; that's what I was arguing against.

As for Herman Cain, I think Zyph already did a good enough job explaining why he'd have a major disadvantage. Running a pizza company doesn't qualify someone for being President of the U.S.

Cain lost me when he showed his complete ignorance of the Palestinian refugee problem, which even my high school history class was made aware of. He'd have to learn about what's going on in the world really fast... and I don't want another learn-as-you-go President. We already have one of those now, and it hasn't worked out so well.
 
New polls have come out today, showing Herman Cain with large primary leads in West Virginia, North Carolina, Nebraska, and a 24 point lead in his home state of Georgia. This is coupled with some strong momentum in national polling over the last two weeks. So what do you think? Does he have a real chance of winning the nomination or is he just the current holder of the "Anyone but Romney" weak support right now? I personally think he will fade in the coming three months as this "Anyone but Romney" feeling continues to cycle between Gingrich, Perry, Bachmann, Santorum, Cain, and maybe Palin if she decides to run.
I guess you don't like him since your poll has a lot of useless selections.
 
You said that nobody would have a serious disadvantage against Obama; that's what I was arguing against.

As for Herman Cain, I think Zyph already did a good enough job explaining why he'd have a major disadvantage. Running a pizza company doesn't qualify someone for being President of the U.S.

Cain lost me when he showed his complete ignorance of the Palestinian refugee problem, which even my high school history class was made aware of. He'd have to learn about what's going on in the world really fast... and I don't want another learn-as-you-go President. We already have one of those now, and it hasn't worked out so well.
And Obama was better qualified when he first ran? What did he know about business or job creation? Nothing at all. What does he know about it now? Nothing at all. How is his foreign policy working? What foreign policy? Domestically he's a total failure.
 
I guess you don't like him since your poll has a lot of useless selections.

I only accidentally hit four sections since it was the default.

What section besides the last one is useless?
 
Last edited:
There is ZERO chance that the GOP will ever give the nod to a black man....at least in this decade.
 
You said that nobody would have a serious disadvantage against Obama; that's what I was arguing against.

I've yet seen an arguement for a serious disadvantage. If this statement was about Bachmann, I'd agree.

As for Herman Cain, I think Zyph already did a good enough job explaining why he'd have a major disadvantage. Running a pizza company doesn't qualify someone for being President of the U.S.

And it's been posted that he's done far more than just that.

Cain lost me when he showed his complete ignorance of the Palestinian refugee problem, which even my high school history class was made aware of. He'd have to learn about what's going on in the world really fast... and I don't want another learn-as-you-go President. We already have one of those now, and it hasn't worked out so well.

I do not know a lot about Cain. As I noted, my support right now is in the fact that he is not Perry or Romney. I've seen nothing to put him at a serious disadvantage yet.
 
Serious disadvantage? No, Cain as of right now does not have one yet.

If he continues to gain traction, someone in the msm media (god willing) will do some research on his past decisions and it'll become a big headline. There is a lot to work with if they just use google. But this just depends if anyone writes or talks about it.
 
Last edited:
And Obama was better qualified when he first ran? What did he know about business or job creation? Nothing at all. What does he know about it now? Nothing at all. How is his foreign policy working? What foreign policy? Domestically he's a total failure.

Yes, my point exactly. I don't want another President anywhere near as inexperienced as him.
 
Back
Top Bottom