Jay Fant

[AuditoreEnterprise]

Bottom line rich idle bank buster buying his way into the rich man's game of politics..

Naive...  all politics is bought my friend.  How do you think Renner is paying for his smear ads?  The PAC that paid for the negative ads is funded by $1.5M of the Florida Medical Association's money....

What's worse.. putting up $138k of your own money (how can putting money up for yourself ever be bad?) or accepting in kind advertising from a lobby?

Do you really believe there are no strings attached with these negative ads? Hahaha

The Lobbyist and Republican Machine are scared of Fant, that's why they persist in negative campaigning.  isn't that obvious?

They want a tool in place that will do what they are told or pay back...

My friend.. Smear?? Naïve??.. When you are as incompetent in finance as Jay Fant proved to be by breaking the bank I don't see that fact as smear rather bringing out the truth that the public should be aware of. Come on now is that the qualifications of a man we want to represent the people..

You should read some history, you may be shocked at the things you come across.

President Harry Truman for example, had two business ventures fail, a zinc mine and a clothing store (which filed bankruptcy) before he went into politics...  Abe Lincoln had a business fail, was sued by creditor's and the assets sold.  Look at most of the early presidents...

So you prove nothing with your one dimensional rhetoric, except what you don't know about people, finances, markets and business...  But keep plugging away, the gallery loves this kind of stuff [insert forum style emoticon here]   

When a picture of your opponent's house (shock $2.8M! value) becomes the main thrust of your campaign, you are bankrupt of ideas and leadership.

Did any of those examples involve a bank venture? Were any of those examples businesses which handled peoples money or assets? Did a federal agency take control of any of the other businesses? Seems they all did damage control prior to an outside agency being forced to step on in order to protect peoples money and assets. I see what point you were trying to make, but be honest those referenced businesses and a bank are two completely different machines. A bank handles money it is a position of trust as opposed to a clothing store or mine. So those comparisons hold no weight to me. I am all for the fact that people deserve a shot at redemption. So let's kill all the petty talk and cut to the chase. In your opinion what qualifies him to be in that position? I think thats all anyone wants to know.

[tufsu1]

^ It is also apples and oranges to compare candidates from 1860 and 1948 with a candidate in 2014.  This is the information age after all.

[mtraininjax]

President Harry Truman for example, had two business ventures fail, a zinc mine and a clothing store (which filed bankruptcy) before he went into politics...  Abe Lincoln had a business fail, was sued by creditor's and the assets sold.  Look at most of the early presidents...

Good grief man, TRUST is the issue here, not what some President or politician did to lead to greatness.  Let Fant prove his salt somewhere else, rebuild a new bank, if anyone will lend him a penny, see if people trust him with a bank, prove that he can be trusted. Prove he can be trusted in the private sector, before giving him keys to the public sector coffers.