Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

WSJ : Pizza Magnate Herman Cain Explores 2012 Presidential Run


Mickalino

Recommended Posts

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2011/01/12/pizza-magnate-herman-cain-explores-2012-presidential-run/

Wall Street Journal : Pizza Magnate Herman Cain Explores 2012 Presidential Run

By Danny Yadron

Herman Cain, a tea party star, talk radio host and former CEO of Godfather’s Pizza, announced Wednesday he’s forming an exploratory committee for a run at the White House.

It’s a bit of a long-shot.

Though Mr. Cain is revered in conservative-activist circles, he is little known elsewhere. He’s never held office and lost a 2004 primary challenge to Georgia Republican Sen. Johnny Isakson. Still, he’s managed to spark a “draft Cain” movement and this weekend will travel to Iowa, his seventh visit there since July 4, 2009.

“The American Dream is under attack,” Mr. Cain said in a statement on his website. “While our country faces grave and complex problems, America is not lost forever. The glory of the American Dream can still be found in the hearts of those who love Her and the promise of freedom She guarantees.”

He goes on, “America is the greatest idea any man has ever imagined.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he was to win, how many toppings would that guarantee us on Monday?

Pizza is not socialist. Every pizza will be personal pan by law. No sharing of slices. In fact, if you are caught having cheese that drips onto another slice expect jailtime or a hefty fine... and don't even think about picking up any fallen toppings and redistributing them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of racists, imagine if he won the nomination, and we had 2 black men running against each other for president, all of the racists and white supremacists would have heart attacks.

That would be a spectacular sight. Sadly, I also think that a presidential election cycle of two black men (or two women, or two whatever non-white males) is probably the only way we'd have an election where people actually vetted the candidates fairly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sadly, I also think that a presidential election cycle of two black men (or two women, or two whatever non-white males) is probably the only way we'd have an election where people actually vetted the candidates fairly.

I agree

---------- Post added January-13th-2011 at 09:09 PM ----------

That would be a spectacular sight. Sadly, I also think that a presidential election cycle of two black men (or two women, or two whatever non-white males) is probably the only way we'd have an election where people actually vetted the candidates fairly.
Why not just two white males? Just curious?

Because white males who are associated with the Republican party or Tea Party, are typically seen as racist, while Democrats are supposed to the most indiscriminate, lovey, get-along with every racey, so the White Male Republican would be at a clear, unfair disadvantage ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would be a spectacular sight. Sadly, I also think that a presidential election cycle of two black men (or two women, or two whatever non-white males) is probably the only way we'd have an election where people actually vetted the candidates fairly.

I think I disagree. Afterall, almost everyone can name the first black baseball player. How many can name the fourth? Once the barrier has been broken the attention and disparity in treatment seems to diminish. Look at basketball... does anyone make any fuss about a black player making an NBA team anymore? Thankfully, there's almost no buzz whatsoever anymore about black qbs either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree

---------- Post added January-13th-2011 at 09:09 PM ----------

Because white males who are associated with the Republican party or Tea Party, are typically seen as racist, while Democrats are supposed to the most indiscriminate, lovey, get-along with every racey, so the White Male Republican would be at a clear, unfair disadvantage ;)

But wouldn't people just toe the party lines if it was two women or two black men running against each other? That's all that happens now anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not just two white males? Just curious?

Now that you ask, I think I would like to believe that if 2012 were white guy A vs white guy B that they would both be vetted, but something in me just thinks a lot of people would vote R or D. I hope I am wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But wouldn't people just toe the party lines if it was two women or two black men running against each other? That's all that happens now anyway.

Yes, it would just be limited to typical political vitriol, instead of a combination of racial, gender, and political vitriol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...