Somehow I doubt it.. The fools who would have supported "know nothing" Cain would not likely be ready to support Ron Paul. Cain's problem wasn't his infidelities.. it was his stupidity.
I still think Obama and his flunkies in the lib news media should have waited until after Cain was the nominee before blowing him up.
Says who? When did the American people elect you to decide such matters? Um never. Ron Paul is on the ballot and thus has as much chance of being elected by We the people as the next one. So stop telling us who we the people can or will elect.
Most women are. Flash a little bling-bling in front of their faces, and they'll say just about anything.
If so then the unpaid campaign workers in the lib news media did their president no favors by attacking Cain so soon.
Good. Another Zionism-sucking philandering infidel out of the picture. Rejoice, America. One less moron on the stage.
..... 1) Well, the republican/T-bagger smear machine has been at work trying to get rid of President Obama since January 2009 and he is still in the White House...wassup wid dat? 2) Jon Huntsman as President, with Ron Paul as VP seems like a doable choice. They both appear to be clean. and ready to do the job they would be elected to do.
I'm not familiar with the issue, but it sounds like someone is finally trying to be honest about the situation, assuming that such is self-criticism.
Ummm, he hasn't been impeached? The support for Hopey Changey has dropped off precipitously, though. 2012 is coming. What's up with you liberals wanting Huntsman? Is he a liberal? Or are you just attacking the candidates who will actually enact change, right now? Maybe you guys know how weak Huntsman and Romney are, so you want them to win the nomination?
Oh yeah? How much did your man have to buy and pay for to get you to marry him? How big is your wedding ring, baby doll?
I think you are right to point out that Cain hasn't been proven guilty of anything. However, I don't understand how you can then say that others are guilty of something when that hasn't been proven either. Please select one standard and apply it equally. Thanks.
Paul's numbers have remained steady between 8-11%. that isn't enough to win anything.As for the Cain accusers, there was never any proof that anything wrong happened. Bialik stated that her room was upgraded by either Cain or the NRA, yet no receipt showing that was ever presented. the same goes for the latest accuser, no proof. Only he said/she said.
WOW is that ever a stretch.....Cain smeared himself by making unwanted advances on employees and having a looooong affair on his wife while paying his mistresses bills. You gotta go a long way on that koolaid yer drinking to make this a "Democrat smear machine". Well that is of course if your honest.....
Simple. These women are saying that he is guilty. He is stating that he is not. People like you are simply assuming that he is guilty because the media says that he is. You have no proof. The media has no proof. Without proof, then it is safe to say that he is innocent. Everything else is simply speculation.
Lib news media....you guys are still masturbating that horse. Good god Mac you already gelded the poor horse now you gotta beat it do death to. Funny how hypocritical the right is when it comes to media bias....also funny just how whiny they are too. Annoying but whiny....
..... 1) uhhh, the first two women won their complaint agaiunst Cain and collected a settlement. Why would the company pay them if they were unsure of his guilt? 2) If you think, that then you are a male chauvinist, and think that women are on earth for just one purpose; to be the recipient of a man's outrageous lust, gropings, rapes, as well as cooking, cleaning after them, and bearing their kids. You need to spend more time out of your cave, paco.....it's a whole new world out there.
And your proof that any of this happened is what? other than the word of people who have a history of making such accusations.