The Florida straw poll does NOT mean anything, except to get deserved visibility for Herman Cain. He won the first Republican debate (without too many people thre). On substrance, he won the last Republican debatge (even though thi blog--and almost everyone else--declared Romney the rea "winner" because Cain has not yet broken through to be a credible "alternative" to Romney and/or Perry). What am I saying, by the way? It is not jsut the Florida straw poll that shows the media to be INCOMPETEN, EVIL BOOBS. That includes the unfair and unbalanced network. Not only does ht eFlorida straw poll (and the Iowa straw poll) mean absolutely NOTHING in terms of who will win the nomination (again except for the self-fulfilling attention the "winner" gets), but ALL of these "scientifc" polls mean absolutely NOTHING Further, they SHOULD mean NOTHING. Opinion polls--all of them--are evil things, and we would be better without them.. Further, we CAN accomplish that by simply LYING to pollsters, and/or failing to cooperate with them and telling them WHY (that you don't believve in polls).
The Cain "victory", however, does mean something, I thiink. First, it means a lot of people out there agree with me on polls. What do polls have to do with who SHOULD be Preident of the United Stat? But I think threre is a further meaning, I believe, although only haveing tangential relevance as to who will eventraully win the Repubican nomination. I would, by the way, be HAPPY to vote for Herman Cain for President, which is more tha I can say for either Romey or Perry. That does nto mean I think Cain will get the nomination. I don't. It does not even mean I think Cain would be a good nominee. I have my doubts. But it would be GREAT if he atually became President of the United States.. Will the hypocrites of the mainstream media still trate criticism of the black President as automatic RACISM? We know they won't. We know it because they are the worst hypocrites to ever walk the Earth, on two legs or four. But, more importantly, we already KNOW that they have made FUN of Herman Cain (Jon Stewart, and others), and have been perfectly willing to criticize heim UNFAIRLY without worrying abourt "racism". Cain's 9-9-9 plan is a truly bold plan. And his "solution" on Social Security is RIGHT--provided we can get there from here, which is a huge problem. I digress.
What is the "message" that these Florida "professionals" are sending to the REPUBLICAN PARTY (yes, john Boehner and Mitch McConnell, this means YOU, and people who think like you)? The message is that people out in the country, especailly conservatives, rEJECT "politics as usual". Yes, as this blog has proven, the REPUBLICAN PARTY has been engaging in "olitics as usual" and that may yet bring that party fo the brink of extinction (even as they should have, and may have, a virtual lock on gaining ful poer in the next election). These SHAM "deals" make people like me--and many more than people like me, if you would suggest there is no one exactly like me--MAD AS HELL (see the movie, "Network"). And what else makes us mad? The INSINCERITY and petty politics of Romeny and Perry. Perry and Romney are NOT out there showing that they are ready to get away from "politics as usual". They are EMBRACING "politics as usual", including demagoguery with regard to each other on things like Social Security . Neither one is showing the ability to attually ADVOCATE conservative principles, and convince people that the class warfare of Obama is wrong. In fact, as I have said, Romney sounds EXACTLY like Obama with regard to his "middle class tax cuts". Romney even uses the sAME NUMBER ($200,000). No, I am not saying that Romney and Perry should not try to distinguish their positions and record, but this desire to beat up on each other more than show that they can ARTIUCLATE conservative principles and solutions, is disaster.
Say Romney, or even Perry, wins the electon after a "politics as usual" campaign in which they RUN AWAY from Tea Partry and conservative positions in the general eletion. If Romney wins the nomination it will probably be because people expect him to win at any cost (to principle)). Roblem: Romney or Perry may actually BELIEVE IT--believe that people jsut want pragmatic "non-principle" rather than a real attempt to THINIK ABOUT and ARTICULATE policies and approaches that are not "poliltics as usual". If Roney or Perry adopts the "politics as suual" approach, either will be a ONE-TERM Persident and will have me as an ENEMY from day one.
To me, that is the "message" of the Herman Cain vote: We don't want "politics as usual". We want to know HOW you intend to defeat Barack Obama, and WHAT kind of THINKING we can expect you to do. Both Romney and Perry are not giving us that. They are not giving ANYBODY that. Herman Cain is little more likely to become the Republican nominee today than yesterday (before the Florida "victory") , But it is not impossible. People are READY for a LEADER who does not think the way to show "leadership" is to DEMAGOGUE your own positioins, and your opponent's positioins, BASED ON POLLS, without really believing a single thing yourself oterh than you want to be President (maybe even believe you will make a good President, but without any CORE of real principle that would ever enable you to be a good President).
Oh. I will give you a "tease". Headline of upcoming article: "John Boehner Must Go: Continuing Resolutions and Politics as Usual."
P.S. No proofreading or spell checking (bad eyesight).