Jeez, who's left? Are they still doing the (seems like) daily debates? Stage has to be getting roomy.

 

That's funny, there was another one last night that I had no idea about.

What sides have changed? I don't honestly rememberr a whole lot about Clinton's first election when those allegations came out, but I'll assume that you mean that as a whole democrats had no problem with Clinton's affairs, but now are using it against Cain. Why would what democrats think worry Cain? He wouldn't win most of their votes, anyway - no republican could. The election is won with the moderates and the independents. As a moderate, he likely wouldn't get my vote. The only two republican candidates that could at the moment are Romney and surprisingly, Gingrich.

 

If I'm missing the big picture here, I am confident that someone here will explain it to me.

Yes, I'm saying Dems have a problem with Cain's and the Republicans now don't have so much of a problem as they did with Clinton. I'm merely pointing out the partisanship of both sides.

Isnt the fact that Newt is now leading enough to show that adultery is not a show-stopper?

I think that was proven under Clinton.

I think that was proven under Clinton.

 

Irrelevant in primary season.

Personally, it doesn't matter. I don't think he would of sustained his place. Every single allegation has no foundation and all of the accusers have shady backgrounds. Its sad to see this happen to Herman Cain.

 

I need to keep this statement fairly generic for obvious reasons. I am familiar with one of the women who alleged sexual harassment by Cain. I've met her a couple times and know people that know her well. There is no way to know with any certainty she's telling the truth, but I'll tell you one thing - she is indeed a credible person and without any obvious sinister motive. Do credible people lie? Sure. Is she lying? Possibly. But don't so too entirely quick to absolutely dismiss their claims, or at least hers. I am told that it was not her desire to re-visit this issue and was not only not responsible for contacting the media, but tried hard initially to protect her identity.

 

With regard to Ginger White, the woman who has claim the longterm affair with Cain, if you do not find her story to be at least somewhat somewhat credible, especially when compared to Cain's laughable denial, I would submit you have "Cain" blinders on. He sounds and looks like a man caught with his hand in the cookie jar. I think it's a reasonably safe bet that a married man who is giving away money - apparently sizeable amounts of money based on his relucatance to discuss it in detail on the advice of his attorney - over a long term period to a woman their wife knows nothing about is probably up to no good. Every time? No. Most of the time? No question.

I need to keep this statement fairly generic for obvious reasons. I am familiar with one of the women who alleged sexual harassment by Cain. I've met her a couple times and know people that know her well. There is no way to know with any certainty she's telling the truth, but I'll tell you one thing - she is indeed a credible person and without any obvious sinister motive. Do credible people lie? Sure. Is she lying? Possibly. But don't so too entirely quick to absolutely dismiss their claims, or at least hers. I am told that it was not her desire to re-visit this issue and was not only not responsible for contacting the media, but tried hard initially to protect her identity.

 

With regard to Ginger White, the woman who has claim the longterm affair with Cain, if you do not find her story to be at least somewhat somewhat credible, especially when compared to Cain's laughable denial, I would submit you have "Cain" blinders on. He sounds and looks like a man caught with his hand in the cookie jar. I think it's a reasonably safe bet that a married man who is giving away money - apparently sizeable amounts of money based on his relucatance to discuss it in detail on the advice of his attorney - over a long term period to a woman their wife knows nothing about is probably up to no good. Every time? No. Most of the time? No question.

 

I didn't quickly dismiss the claims. I have stated that each allegation does not have a solid ground. All of the women that have came out have shady backgrounds. You shouldn't quickly dismiss the possibility that these women are lying. You accuse me of having blinders on because I am not believing that Cain indulged in these acts. I could be wrong but after these women come out their background does to. A women in Axelrod's building, bankruptcy in others past which in the court of law can look like a financial motive. Ginger White has had libel suits against her which she lost, she has also claimed other sexual assaults. So please don't accuse me to have 'Cain blinders on when there can be a viable argument as to the credibility of these women. If these women's credibility wasn't so shady I would have a different tone.

I didn't quickly dismiss the claims. I have stated that each allegation does not have a solid ground. All of the women that have came out have shady backgrounds. You shouldn't quickly dismiss the possibility that these women are lying. You accuse me of having blinders on because I am not believing that Cain indulged in these acts. I could be wrong but after these women come out their background does to. A women in Axelrod's building, bankruptcy in others past which in the court of law can look like a financial motive. Ginger White has had libel suits against her which she lost, she has also claimed other sexual assaults. So please don't accuse me to have 'Cain blinders on when there can be a viable argument as to the credibility of these women. If these women's credibility wasn't so shady I would have a different tone.

 

You're probably right.....these "shady" women are all part of a liberal conspiracy to deny Cain the White House. :lol: I won't bother to say the name of the woman I know. Love to know what's "shady" about her. Bankruptcy? Heaven forbid. And Lord knows there is nothing "shady" about Cain. Nothing the slightest bit suspicious about paying off multiple women who allege sexual harassment, denying any knowledge of it, paying (apparently) large sums of money over a long period of time to a woman your wife knows nothing about, etc.... Dude is just an angel, huh? Too funny. But, hey, we're all entitled to our own opinions. Mine is that Cain is a lying, unethical, clueless buffoon who doesn't have the class or cajones to fess up. Ultimately, though, it doesn't matter - he's an afterthought and will now spend his free time trying to convince his wife that his relationship with White was pure as driven snow.

You're probably right

 

I stopped reading after this.

I stopped reading after this.

 

Good for you.

Good for you.

 

I always knew you were a pink-commie-lib.

Yes, I'm saying Dems have a problem with Cain's and the Republicans now don't have so much of a problem as they did with Clinton. I'm merely pointing out the partisanship of both sides.

 

If the conservative base doesn't have much of a problem with it, why is he suspending his campaign?

If the conservative base doesn't have much of a problem with it, why is he suspending his campaign?

I think it's more of the fact that Newt has been surging. Newt is a better candidate anyway.

Irrelevant in primary season.

:lol: Ok.

I always knew you were a pink-commie-lib.

 

:lol:

I think it's more of the fact that Newt has been surging. Newt is a better candidate anyway.

 

He may be, but I don't think he can defeat Obama. Newt has too much baggage as well, the Democrats would yak on and on about his past, digging up dirt, and avoiding the main issues. The commercials would be vicious.

IMO Romney is the only candidate the GOP has that can unseat Obama.