Washington was all a-Twitter (literally) Monday over Politico’s story about the sexual-harassment charges against Herman Cain — and about Cain’s serial self-contradictions.
Faithful Fox News viewers saw him in the afternoon saying he didn’t know the terms of a settlement reached with the complainants and then saw him tell Greta Van Susteren in the 10 p.m. hour that he did.
The Politico story, quoting no named sources, described Cain’s alleged misconduct as “conversations allegedly filled with innuendo or personal questions of a sexually suggestive nature” and “physical gestures that were not overtly sexual.”
Advertisement
That sounds bad but not horrible. A lot worse was alleged against Bill Clinton, and he was defended by many feminists.
But we don’t know all the relevant facts in this case — the exact charges, the demeanor of the complainants, the conclusions of the National Restaurant Association counsel, the amount of the settlement made in return for the complainants’ dropping the case.
And while we know that some accusations of sexual harassment are false or exaggerated, we know that many others are true.
Many conservatives around the country see this as an attack by the liberal press on a prominent black conservative who is statistically tied for the lead in the race for the Republican presidential nomination.
They’re correct when they say that the liberal mainstream media seem much more interested in exhuming ancient Cain peccadilloes than it was in learning about John Edwards’s extramarital affair and love child.
Or in doing any reporting on Barack Obama’s college grades, terrorist friends, extremist pastor, or dodgy real-estate deal. Can’t spoil his narrative.
But the Constitution guarantees us a free press, not a fair one. Republicans and conservatives start off with some disadvantages in our political world, including a mostly biased press; Democrats and liberals start off with others, like the unpopularity of some of their core convictions. Things seem to balance out over time.
And it has to be said that Cain and, even more, his campaign spokesmen were unprepared to deliver a single definitive response to a story that they had known was brewing for several days. Just as it has to be said that Rick Perry was unprepared to defend his record in Texas in his first three or four presidential debates.
Yes, sometimes we see unpreparedness in the White House. But a candidate who is similarly unprepared will have a hard time getting there.
Some in the liberal commentariat have opined that conservative voters are rallying to Cain because he is black. Maybe so. But most seem to back him because he seems conservative, articulate, and likeable.
We don’t have any significant polling to tell us whether the Politico story has cost Cain support. My hunch is that it hasn’t — at least not yet.
But that leaves the possibility that his support may evaporate when voters have to decide for real. Pollsters ask respondents whom they would vote for “if the election were held today.” But one thing everyone knows is that it isn’t being held today.
That won’t be true when Iowa Republicans venture into precincts caucuses on January 3, the ninth day of Christmas, which is the first real voting day, as it was four years ago.
Then they may respond as members of a midwestern focus group did a couple of weeks ago, when pollster Peter Hart asked them to raise their hands if they thought Cain was prepared to be president. No one did, not even those who had been saying positive things about Cain
We can get some sense of who voters think is prepared for the job from the weekly polls on general-election preference conducted by Scott Rasmussen.
He finds that a generic Republican leads Barack Obama by a 47 percent to 42 percent margin. Obama’s 42 percent tracks pretty well with his job approval in Rasmussen and other polls.
Rasmussen finds that Mitt Romney runs three percentage points behind the generic Republican and two points ahead of Obama. He’s the only Republican running ahead.
Cain and Perry run nine points behind the generic Republican in Rasmussen’s polls. Other candidates run 12 to 15 points behind.
Cain has been leading or tied for the lead for most of a month now, and he may hold that position for a while. But will his lead hold when voters vote for real?
We're unlikely to hear the truth if Herman Cain and his minions of Obama like disciples have their way. The truth is just an inconvenience to the neo-messiah and his worshipping Cainites just as are his many socially and politically liberal statements (that like his sexual misadventures he generally denied and clarified multiple times) are irrelevant. Idolatry doesn't allow for the truth.
Cain may seem like a conservative, but as a Bill Clinton voter it's obvious he's a rube who knows nothing about the Constitution (that he confused with the Declaration of Independence), politics or manners, but he's a marketing genuis.
Alleged this, alleged that, where is the proof? This includes the Cain camp accusing the Perry camp.
I will join in the spirit of this oddly mischievous exercise in intrigue and allege that Clinton Inc. has its sticky fingers all over this (since I am convinced that ambition has no sell-buy date). After all who did not fare very well against a black candidate and one who had lots of dosh? Killing two birds with one allege?
If there's one thing about Lemons that you have to appreciate, it's his abilty to admit guilt without directly admitting it. He's a bird with sticky fingers. ;-D
Face it, Cain is toast. And once again it is not so much about the actual allegations whether they are true, untrue, or somewhere in between; rather it is about the response. Cain is clearly not ready for primetime.
"Republicans and conservatives start off with some disadvantages in our political world, including a mostly biased press; Democrats and liberals start off with others, like the unpopularity of some of their core convictions. Things seem to balance out over time."
So people like the democrats less, but to balance that out, the press is unfair to Republicans. Hardly seems like an equitable "balance," does it?
While there are aspects of Cain that I like, I have found his incuriosity of foreign affairs most troubling. This has now spilled out into his incuriosity about reports of SH Politico gave him a heads-up then days before it published it (which I have found to be a high-tech lyncing a la Clarence Thomas, something I speculated much earlier). More than that, Cain should have had his answers thought out before the report hit. I have said it before, and I will say it again, whatever the truth is her, Cain could have handled this better, much better. His inability to do so raises questions about his fitness to be President.
Meanwhile, the potential Republican nominees are simply self-destructing with all the backbiting going on, especially with Cain accusing Perry and Perry pointing the finger at Romney. This does not bode well for the Republicans down the pike.
Cain is not the hill Conservatives want to die on. This guy is a loose cannon, who doesn't have the intellectual curiosity or depth necessary to lead the Nation.
No RINOs. But the big O is too dangerous ... he must be voted out.
Cain, and his team, have truly flubbed this one. It is a distraction.
Obama's and the left's big government policies are destroying our economy and our nation.
Perry will open the borders. Romney flip/flops himself ( and in print ). Gingrich can't win on top of the ticket ( same for Santurom and maybe Bachmann). Paul is a nut. Huntsman and Johnson are well left of center.
Cain is the most conservative candidate that can win. Cain will win. And maybe take Gingrich as VP.
Personally, I DON'T CARE ABOUT WHATEVER HAPPENED 10 YEARS AGO (as long as it wasn't criminal). We need to change national policies and take down the left's stranglehold on a large portion of our voting population. Having a minority conservative (i.e. a non-RINO) in the bully pulpit will destroy the left; and the left knows this.
Let us all watch this Saturday's C-SPAN ...
Cain-Gingrich Lincoln-Douglas debate.
Given this week, I think it is a do-die for Cain (not for the allegations, but the mishandling of them).
If he can come off in a draw ( or close ) to Gingrich ... We have POTUS #45.
I hate to say this, but the smartest move for Cain would be to confess to inapprpriate actions toward women in his past, then use that as a boilerplate answer anytime anyone asks him about anything sexual - the way W. handled his decades'-past drug use. I mean he should confess it whether he's guilty or not. How's that for unconventional? If he were to do this in the next 72 hours, it wouldn't hurt him. It would take the air out of the issue, weakening it as a weapon.
Better still, make a ridiculously over-the-top confession. Confess that he spent decades pimping out prostitutes. In fact, he's the kingpin of the Asian and Russian international sex trade empire.
Then, as incredible as it is, stick to that story. What would the press do? Anytime a bimbo eruption came up, Cain could say, "It's all true. I was personally checking out her qualifications because we were going to put her in a box and ship her to the Sultan of Stanstanstanstan.
"Why do I do these things? Because I'm a player."
It's what Jack Kennedy would do if he were around today.
I like how the women aren't allowed to talk per court order and people shout "why are they ANONYMOUS"? "Where are the complaints? What were they?" Then they repeat Cain's story about his wife's height comment as if it's the definitive story. It's laughable watching people defend this guy.
Why will Cain be hurt by vague 'allegations' when Clinton was not hurt by clear facts? Sure, Dems like Clinton, Barney Frank, Charlie Rangel, Maxine Waters, Pelosi, Anthony Weiner, et al are given a pass by the media, but Cain should just stay quiet from now on in. Issue a statement and then declare that the issue is closed and he will no longer discuss it publicly. If reporters persist, just let them know he will only be answering questions about policy. And Cain should get a new campaign manager...the one he has now is a disaster. Cain should talk to Karl Rove and Dick Morris for advice on how to proceed...
The fundamental problem with Cain is that he simply doesn't have the minimum qualifications for the job. Suppose you compiled a list of the 1,000 Americans most qualified to be President based strictly on their resumes. It'd include most current and recent state governors, lots of senators, quite a few House members with stints as committee chairman or caucus leadership, and probably a bunch of major cabinet members. There'd be a few private sector people, but they'd be people who had some really special accomplishments - people like Bill Gates, Donald Trump, Warren Buffett, maybe some guys who'd built huge companies from scratch. Maybe someone like Rush Limbaugh who revolutionized an industry. But a former CEO of a mid-size pizza chain who went on to head a lobbying organization? He probably wouldn't even be in the top 10,000 prospects.
Resume qualifications aren't everything - I doubt Romney would make the top 100, and Obama probably wouldn't have in 2008. But Cain isn't even close.
Think about the people you are describing and whether they really would be more qualified. The economy is the big issue this election and for that we need someone with business experience.
Obama wouldn't have made the top 1M in my list and I'd put any cabinet member with no business experience behind many with executive business experience and no political experience.
Donald Trump is a lot of hype, and in light of Trumps multiple bankrupcies, Cain has the better businees record. Cain didn't just head a mid-sized pizza chain, he rescued it from oblivion, turned it into a success and led the group that bought it out.
Compared to Cain, Bill Gates and Warren Buffet hardly started from scratch. They started as part of the top 1% while Cain started in the bottom 10%. That doesn't lessen their achievement getting to the top 0.001%, but it does make Cain's more impressive.
More importantly, qualifications for president are about personal character and ability and I'd rather we didn't have a professional political class. (The character aspect is why the accusations against Cain, if substantiated, would be damaging).
Chairman of a Federal Reserve bank. Very successful CEO of a large corporatio, with a ton of successful corporate positions that elevated him to that. Masters Degree in Computer Science.
Anyone who tries to paint Hermain Cain's resume as a weak point is telling the "big lie", and it's almost funny.
Compare his resume to Mr. Community Organizer. Oh, wait...that wouldn't be fair, would it? Actually, it would be a laugher.
As time passes, support for Cain is firming up among those who really like him, while it's fading among those who were more skeptical. It seems like the more controversy that surrounds him, the more it hardens whatever opinion you had before.
It may turn him from someone most Republicans are positive on but few would vote for to one only some Republicans are positive on but more would vote for.
Either way, people who vote based on who they think is a better matchup for Obama are probably overthinking themselves, in an incumbent election, it is still about the incumbent.
