GOAT

Is that actually real?

Yep, was on Daily Show too,

Herman Cain is a god.

His role of a Governor for his State has nothing to do with the role of the President of the Country, it's completely within the States rights.

surely then if, say, massachusetts as a whole supported gay marriage and it were legal in massachusetts, nobody would hold a democratically elected representative responsible for its legality?

OH HEY WAIT A SEC!

He's totally responsible for Romneycare, thus it's called Romneycare, I'm not sure what your point is. He's never made any excuses for it either.

why is it surprising to you that republican primary voters want mitt romney to have governed according to a conservative ideology rather than one that mimics the majority views of massachusetts voters?

saying "it's within states rights" doesn't change the fact that it's a terrible policy. all you are addressing with that blather (unfortunately it's just completely meaningless drivel, states rights, lol, idk why i'm even responding to it), is the constitutional issue, not the economic/fiscal/moral side of it. if you support government programs like universal healthcare or mandated health insurance, you simply do not understand the arguments in favor of small government. if you think it's good for any state, you have absolutely no business claiming to support the free market.

Man huntsman is reasonable and his daughters are hot!!! All on piers Morgan atm

Chinese spies, the whole lot.

Exactly the reason why he has a snowballs chance in hell at being the nominee.

I suppose it's worth pointing out that I repeatedly see liberals on this board declare him "reasonable" as a euphemism for "more liberal than most of the GOP field." It's just being repeated so many times that it's practically being treated like an objective truth...

I like Huntsman, he'd probably be my fourth choice of GOP candidates (and that's not an insult coming from me), but it's far from being some terrible tragedy that he isn't competing heavily in this.

fixed that up for you

I already covered the false equivalence given to intelligence and liberalism a few days ago...

Your "opinion" on things like climate change or evolution is a pretty good indicator for your intelligence.

I suppose it's worth pointing out that he was the governor of arguably the most conservative state in the country too.

Things are rolling a little faster than I thought, but thats a good thing.

There are two points that make for interesting discussion about this primary, and I would hope that people who follow politics would want to focus on them.

1. The horse race

Can the establishment republican, good looking and well spoken, with all the money and backing, hold off the old conservative hero who has the smarts and the chops but marries ever other woman that sleeps with him?

2. Who does the White house want to run against, and what will they do to get who they want?

Not that I disagree with you on either thing (judging by the tone of your post), but conveniently setting up an intelligence litmus test based on arbitrarily placing a couple of points of contention as the be all and end all of it is obviously flawed methodology.

Cain is the most made-to-order candidate for Obama to beat handily, so my guess would be him. Obviously fringe types like Bachmann and Santorum would be great for Barack, but those aren't happening.

In a broader political context "reasonable" means...

Continuing to borrow 40% of US budget from China...
Continue to increase the zillion $$$ debt indefinitely...
Continue ZIRP and run USD printing presses 24/7/365...
Demonize anyone addressing entitlement programs...
Continue to expand the public sector full speed...
Create regulations that mimic laws rejected by Congress...
Crony Capitalism works... continue to expand corruption...
Leadership is hard = destroy that GOP guy's character...
Etc, etc...

It's just being repeated so many times...
That it's practically being treated like an objective truth...
While the Founding Fathers are spinning in their graves.

That real man Scott Pelley is "reasonable"...
Huntsman and his hot daughters are "reasonable"...
Mitt Romney is only pretending not to be "reasonable"...
So he can trick those crazy, inbred, GOP extremists.

LOL, is this a joke?

It obv would be. But my point was that people who acknowledge that things that are proven to be real (climate change and evolution just being the easiest examples) are real can be considered more intelligent than people who don't.

I always find it a bit silly when people make here huge divides over essentially jurisdictional issuess. As in, being totally supportive of one plan because it is a state plan and being entirely against it because it is a federal plan. Sure there is a distinction here and constitutionality issues and whatever else. But if you really feel Romneycare is amazing and Obama care the ultimate evil just because of the jurisdictional difference then this is just a bit silly imo

But certainly not without tons of exceptions. It's not as though one could honestly power rank all humans in terms of intelligence with a person's take on two whole issues as the dividing line.

It has become a lazy presumption on the part of the left to label as a conservative as stupid until proven otherwise. It is a silly presumption and needs to die.